Wikipedia:XfD today

Shortcuts

This page transcludes all of the deletion debates opened today on the English-language Wikipedia, including articles, categories, templates, and others, as a convenience to XfD-watchers. Please note that because this material is transcluded, watchlisting this page will not provide you with watchlist updates about deletions; WP:DELT works best as a browser bookmark checked regularly.

Speedy deletion candidates[edit]

Candidates for speedy deletion

User talk:80.215.254.189/sandbox/archive

User talk:89.85.243.55/sandbox/archive

User talk:176.173.220.155/sandbox/archive

Anders Hallberg (disambiguation)

Draft:Balaji (Digital Marketing Expert & Trainer)

Draft:Can you Hear the Laughter (Doctor Who)

Kerry Xuefeng Chen

Draft:Def

Draft:Detective Who (TV series)

File talk:En-us-Oceania.ogg

Draft:English

Lluís Farré

User:Heatyeet/Micronesian Civil War

Draft:Home page

Draft:Home page/Items

User:Jdoxpears/sandbox

Draft:Jsa

Draft:Justin (TV series)

Draft:List of LaRussos episodes

Draft:New Ho Queen

Nuno Antonio Ramos Vinhas

Draft:October: The Story of the Russian Revolution

Draft:Padlan

Port-Cartier Institution

Draft:Sherlock Who

Draft:The Detective (Detective Who)

Draft:The LaRusso season 1

Draft:The LaRusso season 2

Draft:The LaRusso season 3

Draft:The LaRusso season 4

Draft:The LaRusso season 5

Articles[edit]

Recent AfDs: Today Yesterday

Media Organisations Biography Society Web Games Science Arts Places Indiscern. Not-Sorted

< May 31	June 02 >

Guide to deletion

Purge server cache

Vladlena Sandu[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A screenwriter and theater director who has directed some non-notable films and documentaries fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:FILMMAKER. There is no significant coverage in third-party reliable sources. Almost all currently cited sources are interviews, with a few being unreliable or merely passing mentions. GSS ^💬 15:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Ukraine. GSS ^💬 15:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:53, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mutating Mutants[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Mainly fails WP:Notability, did not find any sources for this article. GoodHue291 (talk) 23:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Jami al-Kamil[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don’t think this book is notable as it lacks in depth coverage in reliable independent sources. I tried redirecting to the article about its author but was reverted so bringing here for consensus. Mccapra (talk) 12:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Islam. Mccapra (talk) 12:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The book is first ever complete collection of Sahih hadith. The article is important. ^[1]59.152.2.172 (talk) 15:15, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately that link is dead and it’s not clear what you mean by “the first ever complete collection of sahih hadith.” There have been several much earlier authoritative collections. This sounds like it’s just a mashup of those. Mccapra (talk) 18:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

see this video, it will make it clear, https://m.youtube.com/watch?si=263pYfjjZHWouyJ1&v=gHmB5LG1JxU&feature=youtu.be. 59.152.2.172 (talk) 00:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok but that’s not an independent source. I’m looking for in-depth coverage of this book by independent reviewers or commentators. Mccapra (talk) 00:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

" Although Professor Azmi has authored dozens of books on various important Islamic topics, his voluminous compilation of authentic Hadith titled “Al-Jami’ al-Kamil fi al-Hadith al-Sahih al-Shamil” is considered the most important. It is one of the most comprehensive books on Hadith by a single scholar since the dawn of Islam. Azmi has taken pain to collect the authentic Hadiths dispersed in numerous classical books. It is made up of more than 20 volumes, containing about 16,000 Hadiths dealing with various issues such as creeds, rulings, worship, biography of the Prophet (peace be upon him), chapters of jursiprudence, interpretation of the Glorious Qur’an and many more. Azmi will be remembered for this great service like those earlier compilers of Hadiths collections such as Imam Bukhari, Imam Mslim, Abu Dawood, At-Tirmidhi, Imam al-Nasa’i, Ibn Majah and Imam Malik."^[2]

"The once Hindu youth Banke Lal and today's Sheikh Ziaur Rahman Azmi have done many important and significant works. 'Al Jamiul Kamil Fil Hadees Sahihis Shamil' is one of his most important books. Many learned hadith scholars and Muslim scholars say that this book can be called the only book in the history of the last 1400 years, where only authentic hadiths have been placed without any repetition. 16 thousand hadiths have been compiled in this hadith book. Shaikh Ziaur Rahman Ajmer has spent 15 years of work in this. He has taken the help of more than 200 hadith books in this large work of 20 volumes."^[3] 59.152.2.172 (talk) 14:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The most pure hadith book in the world after the Quran. Md Joni Hossain (talk) 14:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are fanboy comments not policy-based arguments for keeping. Which genuinely independent sources agree with this assessment? Mccapra (talk) 17:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't appear to meet WP:ORG / WP:GNG. Last AfD had low participation. Boleyn (talk) 16:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and California. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akiko Kitamura[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level does not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. Google search turns up nothing outside of wikis and scoring databases. Previous AFD received zero arguments in favor of keeping this article that cited any evidence of notability. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Skating, and Japan. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ledo Hotel[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a demolished hotel, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria. The referencing here is more than 50 per cent reference bombed to primary sources that aren't support for notability at all, such as photographs and directory entries and the self-published websites or Twitter feeds of entities named in the article. And even what there is for proper media coverage isn't building a particularly strong case for notability, as it's entirely local coverage either (a) focusing specifically on the site's place in the city's perennially changing arena-block redevelopment project rather than anything that would establish that it was ever actually noteworthy as a hotel, or (b) tangentially verifying other facts that have nothing whatsoever to do with the hotel, like the existence of the McEwen Architecture School and the farmer's market.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt this hotel from having to have a stronger notability claim than just having existed, or from having to have more than just "what is to be done to redevelop the land it used to be on?" for coverage. Bearcat (talk) 17:11, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 17:11, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Travel and tourism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

78th Road[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet anything at WP:NROADS and there's nothing to show significant coverage in any reliable sources.

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:

-- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 18:38, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Myanmar-related deletion discussions. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 18:38, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dance of the Vampires (disambiguation)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Disambiguation page not required (WP:ONEOTHER). Primary topic redirect points to an article with a hatnote to the only other use. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support clear-cut case, surprised it survived PROD. PatGallacher (talk) 14:40, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second usage added. CapnZapp (talk) 16:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep 3 valid entries. There might be additional entries too. Boleyn (talk) 17:00, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:55, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pidge (Voltron)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG no sigcov outside of listicles and primary sources. There is one seemingly good source from the Mary Sue but I don't think that's enough. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 22:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Comics and animation, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge I think this article should be merged to List of Voltron characters as a compromise. Dwanyewest (talk) 08:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Why not do all the characters at once? Princess Allura, Hunk, Keith, Lance, Prince Lotor, Sven / Shiro, and Emperor Zarkon. I created the Voltron fandom years ago, and when the latest Voltron series was made, they worked directly with me on putting information there about it. If people want to learn about the characters, they can just go to https://voltron.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Characters and find more detail. Dream Focus 15:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Copyright violation. This information was on the official Voltron wiki [1] back in 2011, which is older than this article, and unlike this article it has references to which episodes information was in. Dream Focus 15:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[2] The user that copied it mentioned https://voltron.fandom.com/wiki/Pidge_(Legendary_Defender) in a reference for where the information came from. Dream Focus 22:55, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete per WP:COPYVIO 104.7.152.180 (talk) 00:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Voltron Fandom Wiki Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted according to a notice at the bottom of the Pidge page, so I'm not sure if the copyright violation necessarily applies as a deletion reason in this specific case. I've added attribution to the edit history. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:30, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there any more support for a Merge, assuming that content doesn't violate our copyright guidelines?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Cosmo International 2024[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:EVENT Claggy (talk) 22:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Claggy (talk) 22:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Beauty pageants and Vietnam. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:49, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A clear case of WP:TOOSOON. Page could be recreated once the event has been held, however. TH1980 (talk) 00:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It would be held. Just like in any other international pageant that is going to happen within the year, it's not too soon to create an article for this. Example of which is Miss Universe, which would be held in September/November (even if there's no clear date yet but there's an article for that. So, I'd disprove of that. I'd retain it.

Suggestions would only include a few more citations and reliable references from the media/news. Take these into consideration before even deleting this. Thank you. Japemizen627 (talk) 07:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No please don't delete the page. The event will be held soon in October

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Simes[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notoriety per either WP:GNG or WP:NARTIST. I couldn't independently find awards or significant coverage by specialized, independent sources. Rkieferbaum (talk) 22:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Argentina, and United States of America. Rkieferbaum (talk) 22:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rkieferbaum: Hi! Posting here as well - I have a compiled list of awards and coverage from good sources that will be relevant here. I will update this page with them as soon as I can. Please hold. LocusXovier (talk) 22:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LocusXovier: hi there! By all means. Normally deletion discussions are open for a week and they can be relisted. I'll be sure to watch the page and gladly give my input. Feel free to ping me if you don't hear from me. Cheers! Rkieferbaum (talk) 23:36, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pdftotext[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable software per WP:N. SL93 (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. SL93 (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mamadou Baïlo Diallo[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NPOL or WP:BASIC. Being a counsellor of the National Transition Council doesn't make one presumptively notable under NPOL so there's literally nothing to establish notability here. BEFORE doesn't help. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Africa. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn't meet WP:GNG. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 23:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Facility information model[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG as I could not find any coverage in secondary sources at all Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Doljești and Orbic[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I could not find any sources to prove that these events took place in the dates mentioned, which would fail WP:NEVENT. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Moldova, and Romania. Shellwood (talk) 22:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cele De[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NBAND as I could not find any coverage in sources to back up any claims made in the article. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 21:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California. Shellwood (talk) 22:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Julia Kova[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The significance of the person is not visible in WP: MUSIC. Among the links are her official website and social networks.--Анатолий Росдашин (talk) 20:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 1. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Saint George S.C. players[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence this list of self-selected players meets the WP:LISTN. Let'srun (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Football, Lists, and Ethiopia. Let'srun (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Zero notability, a category for the players from this club is enough. Svartner (talk) 22:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kaafir (Pakistani TV series)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't find sign/in-depth coverage, such as reviews. All I could find is some ROTM coverage like this, this and this. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 15:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: could be reasonably redirected to the page about the director if the one-paragraph appraisal im Dawn Humayun Saeed’s negative role in Kaafir actually made one feel disgusted by his character. This drama proved how his star quality and ability to reach to the audience never fails. The good vs. evil; directed by Shahid Shafaat gave us the story Shahan Ali Khan (Humayun Saeed) who is living a dual life; in front of his family he pretended to be virtuous but resorted to his evil and malicious side when away from them. The twists were woven captivatingly into the narrative although the play did go a little over board with its bold dialogues and settings. and this review (https://www.thequint.com/entertainment/hot-on-web/zee-5-kaafir-dia-mirza-mohit-raina) for example are not judged sufficient. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Mushy Yank, I'm fine with redirection. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per Mushy Yank provided source, also easily passes WP:NTV, broadcasted on national television channel ARY Digital. Libraa2019 (talk) 18:30, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Libraa2019, But NTV is an essay, not a policy. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:46, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Caution: Arguing with and sometimes just commenting on each individual who disagrees with you risks moving in a disruptive direction.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Samsung U740 Alias[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Is this notable enough for a standalone article? Possible ATD is merge/redirect to Samsung, but I am not sure if this would be helpful, especially as this article is totally unreferenced. Boleyn (talk) 16:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Technology. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:53, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge I've added some refs but I'd go for a selective merge with Samsung U750 Alias 2. Both are late 2000's phone, but they were popular at the time of their release, and we have mainstream coverage of both. — hako9 (talk) 19:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Ruiz II[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Chiefs of staff do not count as a political office for purposes of NPOL, and it doesn't seem like there is sufficient coverage to meet the standards of WP:BASIC unfortunately. Deprod by Clearfrienda, not sure which sources they were referring to, perhaps the AP? Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Politicians, and Arizona. Alpha3031 (t • c) 15:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: In cases where there is some substantial coverage I usually object with PRODs in case there's a chance they can be kept. In this case, there's this local 12news.com article and this ktar.com article which both go WP:INDEPTH. There are some less-significant mentions in this NYT article, this kold.com article, and this azcentral.com article. I'd lean towards delete but it's a close call. Clear friend a ^💬 16:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WMJQ-CD[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG with just two sources, MeTV affiliation notwithstanding. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 15:27, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and New York. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 15:27, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If he were among us[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 14:59, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Saudi Arabia. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:59, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ahmad Al Shugairi: presenter. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As nominator, I support a redirect as ATD DonaldD23 talk to me 21:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Adozi[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. There's not a source that is independent of the subject. Some are WP:ROUTINE coverages which announce him bagging an award, they all appear in exactly copy, verbatim. Others are his opinions, etc. No source can be used to establish GNG here. Some are "Why is did this" and "Why I did that"-ish, while others are "How we're doing this" and "How we're doing that"-ish, which falls under WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:09, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: "40 under 40 awards" are not notable, nor do the others appear to be notable. Typical PROMO articles that we see from Nigeria that pop up here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:12, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep -

- Vanguared: Generally unreliable per WP:NGRS

- nairametrics is mostly quotations, considered unreliable

- Youtube is an interview, considered unreliable

- businessday - mostly quotations, considered unreliable

- tmynewspaper - mostly quotations, considered unreliable

- punchng is about his company, with some mentions of him. Not enough to count towards notability.

- Independent - There is enough here to count towards notability. Some quotations. Publication is generally reliable per WP:NGRS.

- Guardian - like the above, good one. generally reliable per WP:NGRS.

- leadership - based on an interview, not reliable.

- Guardian - based on an interview, not reliable.

- thenationonlineng - based on an interview, not reliable.

- The Sun - This is a good article and publication reliable per WP:NGRS.

Summary: I found 3 articles to be acceptable, which in my opinion is barely enough for a keep, so a weak keep is my vote.Hkkingg (talk) 08:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You clearly do not know what WP:GNG talks about, kindly read that. I don’t want to waste my time on a source assessment. There’s, as a matter of fact, no source that satisfies GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:03, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

3 of the sources are from reliable publications per WP:NGRS and have significant coverage. How exactly are these not within WP:GNG? I realize that many of these decisions are subjective, while one person may decide something is a valid source another may not think so. You don't need to argue every person that opposes your nomination. Let the admins be the judge. Hkkingg (talk) 19:21, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hkkingg It is imperative that I let you know that if there's anyone to analyse and assess WP:NGRS here, it should be me or any other Nigerian who knows very well about how Nigerian media works, don't be deceived. And again, this is a deletion discussion, and we are bound to argue things out. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per nomination above. ᗩvírαm7 • [@píng mє] 05:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep it civil, folks.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not swayed to change my !vote after the source analysis above. Oaktree b (talk) 19:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Chantler[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

These sources cover the subject only in relation to his death, nothing more, as per my WP:BEFORE. Therefore, the article fails WP:BLP1E, which states, "Reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.

Breakdown of cited sources:

1: https://podcastingtoday.co.uk/one-of-the-founders-of-podcast-radio-paul-chantler-has-died/ (Single Event fails WP:BLP1E)
2: https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1883531/BBC-radio-executive-Paul-Chantler-dead (Single Event fails WP:BLP1E)
3: https://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/17547788.bbc-wiltshire-celebrates-30th-birthday-three-decades-first-broadcast-1989/ (Interview type article, no coverage of the subject)
3: https://premierchristian.news/en/news/article/tributes-paid-to-radio-exec-and-friend-of-premier-paul-chantler (Again single event tributes Fails WP:BLP1E)
4: https://radiotoday.co.uk/2024/03/friends-and-colleagues-pay-tribute-to-radio-executive-and-entrepreneur-paul-chantler/ (Fails WP:BLP1E)
5: https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/tributes-paid-after-death-of-influential-uk-radio-executive-304320/ (Again a single event fails WP:BLP1E). GrabUp - Talk 12:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and United Kingdom. GrabUp - Talk 12:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I may be missing something, but these obit articles have been published as a result of his death - but it is *not* the event of his death that is the reason why the papers find this person notable enough to publish the article. For example one source states "He was one of radio’s most respected and popular characters". Evidently the coverage is not in the context of a single event. I do not see how WP:BLP1E applies. ResonantDis_tortion 16:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ResonantDistortion, WP:BLP1E simply mentions “Reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.” These sources are published in context of a single event which is his death! It is simple as that. You said “but it is *not* the event of his death that is the reason why the papers find this person notable enough to publish the article.” If you really think he is notable then cite some reliable sources with in-depth coverage of the subject. But these sources are just in the context of his death. GrabUp - Talk 16:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grabup - no - it really is not that simple. You appear to be arguing a blanket statement that obituaries do not count towards notability. If I was to die tomorrow of a fairly common disease, I can assure you I would not get an editorial obituary in any publication. None of the cited obit coverage is published because the actual event of the subjects death is particularly newsworthy, but because of the accomplishments of the subject during the rather more sustained period of their life. There is an interesting discussion here which I suggest you review, [3], which includes a quote by the author of BLP1E, @Jclemens, that "but in no way, shape, or form is an obituary one event". For the record, I have no opinion on the notability of the subject nor the reliability of the sources - I am rather challenging the blanket assumption that (editorial) obituaries do not count towards notability. ResonantDis_tortion 02:39, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All of the sources mentioned above, except one, are citing RadioToday’s report; they are not reporting independently. Additionally, the sources are filled with statements from connected individuals, tributes, and similar content. Do these types of obituaries count towards notability? The first source appears unreliable to me, as it lacks editorial details. Other sources are just repeating what others are saying. GrabUp - Talk 03:18, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:15, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree with User:Grabup - the articles mainly say what a wonderful guy he was, but do not give the kind of information that would support notability. I noticed that some of the articles mentioned that he had co-authored a book (but none gave a title). I cannot find any publication by him nor his name in the biggest name authority file. Lamona (talk) 04:53, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable broadcaster presenting on well known local and national radio stations. J97736 (talk) 14:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
presented * the stations mentioned should surely explain his notability. J97736 (talk) 14:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hunan Coal Group[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I did WP:BEFORE and searched for independent reliable sources to establish the notability of the subject as per WP:GNG and WP:NCORP, but I found nothing that can establish notability. Here is a breakdown of cited sources:

1: http://www.hnmyjt.com/Item/2.aspx (This is the official website of the Company and is WP:PRIMARY, so it can't establish notability, The full article is just rely on this source)
2: https://www.hunan.gov.cn/hnszf/hnyw/zwdt/201212/t20121210_4719900.html (A government site, can't really establish notability, Just listed hundreds of companies in China)
3: https://clb.org.hk/en/content/hunan-coalminers-strike-over-privatization-plans (Just Passing mention to Hunan Coal Group and the article is only about the "Strike" of the workers of the company, not about the company.
4: https://caijing.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202107/20/WS60f66c85a3101e7ce975a86d.html (The article is talking about the history of coal in Hunan, no coverage of the Hunan Coal Group at all. Also, At the end, the article mentions:"(Author Liao Jianxiang is Secretary and Chairman of the Party Committee of Hunan Coal Group Co., Ltd.")
5: https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-05/22/content_5292722.htm (Government site, Even I skip that part, the article does not give in-depth coverage of the subject, it talk about the Jailed of Chairman of Hunan Coal Industry) GrabUp - Talk 12:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and China. GrabUp - Talk 12:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been reviewed and rated Stub-class, which means it is a promising starting article, though large space remains for improvement.

Hunan Coal Group is a large coal mine company of more than 30,000 employees, the largest in Hunan Province of China. This fact alone may make it worthwhile for an introduction in wiki.

As for the reliability of the sources, I will discuss later. Ctxz2323 (talk) 00:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ctxz2323: As you said, “Hunan Coal Group is a large coal mining company with more than 30,000 employees, the largest in Hunan Province of China. This fact alone may make it worthwhile for an introduction in Wiki.” From which Wikipedia rule did you get this information? Go and read WP:NCORP. It requires multiple in-depth coverages from reliable, independent sources to establish notability. It doesn’t really matter how big the company is; if the company is significant, it should obviously get coverage from reliable sources. Also, an article getting reviewed does not guarantee that it will be there forever. GrabUp - Talk 03:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Xie, Chunyang 谢春阳 (2008-02-29). "湘煤集团损失巨大急需援手" [Hunan Coal Group has suffered huge losses and is in urgent need of help]. China Coal News [zh] (in Chinese).
  The article notes: "在今年年初我国南方部分地区遭受的罕见冰雪灾害中，湖南省煤业集团(以下简称湘煤集团)遭受巨大损失，在恢复和重建过程中急需有关部门伸出援手。今年1月中旬以来的冰雪灾害持续时间长，破坏性大，历史罕见．给湘煤集团造成了巨大损失，此次灾害申，湘煤集团的51对矿井停电15天至25天，其中停电5昼夜以上的矿井21对，停电15昼夜以上的矿井11对，停电25昼夜以上只能采用柴油机发电保井的矿井5对。"
  From Google Translate: "In the rare ice and snow disaster that hit parts of southern my country at the beginning of this year, Hunan Coal Group (hereinafter referred to as Hunan Coal Group) suffered huge losses and urgently needed help from relevant departments in the recovery and reconstruction process. The ice and snow disaster since mid-January this year lasted for a long time, was extremely destructive, and is rare in history. The disaster caused huge losses to Xiang Coal Group. According to the disaster, 51 pairs of mines of Xiang Coal Group were without power for 15 days to 25 days, including 21 pairs of mines with power outages for more than 5 days and nights, 11 pairs of mines with power outages for more than 15 days and nights, and 25 pairs of mines with power outages for 25 days and nights. The above 5 pairs of mines can only use diesel engines to generate electricity to protect the mines."
2. Xin, Wen 欣文 (2008-02-27). "湘煤集团受灾矿井抓紧排水" [Hunan Coal Group's disaster-stricken mines pay close attention to drainage]. China Coal News [zh] (in Chinese).
  The article notes: "本报讯1月中旬以来拘冰冻灾害，导致湖南电网严重受损，造成大面积停电，致使湘煤集团51对生产矿井中，有44对矿井不同程度遭受了淹井、淹水平的重创。．目前，湘煤集团正抓紧受灾五_L井排水工作，力争早日恢复生产。据统计，此次冰灾中，因矿井停产、设备损毁、旁屋倒塌和各项救灾投入给湘煤集团造成的损失已超过5亿元，有十多万职工家属正常生活受到严重影响。"
  From Google Translate: "This newspaper reported that the freezing disaster since mid-January has caused serious damage to Hunan's power grid and caused widespread power outages. As a result, 44 of the 51 pairs of production mines of the Hunan Coal Group have suffered varying degrees of flooding. At present, Hunan Coal Group is stepping up the drainage work of the disaster-stricken 5_L well and striving to resume production as soon as possible. According to statistics, during this ice disaster, the losses caused to Hunan Coal Group by mine shutdowns, equipment damage, side building collapses, and various disaster relief investments exceeded 500 million yuan, and the normal lives of more than 100,000 employees' family members were severely affected."
3. Yue, Guanwen 岳冠文 (2006-06-20). "湘煤集团成立" [Hunan Coal Group was established]. Changsha Evening News (in Chinese). p. A6.
  The article notes: "湖南煤业集团(简称湘煤集团)是以涟邵矿业集团、白沙煤电集团、资兴矿业集团、长沙矿业集团、湘潭矿业集团和省辰溪煤矿6家国有骨干煤炭企业重组而成的大型企业。其中前三家进入2005年全国煤炭工业100强企业行列。"
  From Google Translate: "Hunan Coal Group (referred to as Xiang Coal Group) is a large-scale enterprise reorganised from six state-owned backbone coal enterprises: Lianshao Mining Group, Baisha Coal and Electricity Group, Zixing Mining Group, Changsha Mining Group, Xiangtan Mining Group and the provincial Chenxi Coal Mine. Among them, the first three entered the ranks of the top 100 enterprises in the national coal industry in 2005."
4. Ruan, Xiaoqin 阮晓琴 (2006-06-20). "湘煤集团昨日正式挂牌，计划进军内蒙古与山西开矿" [Hunan Coal Group was officially listed yesterday and plans to enter Inner Mongolia and Shanxi to open mines]. Shanghai Securities Journal (in Chinese).
  The article notes: "湘煤集团由湖南省6家国有骨干煤炭企业重组而成：涟邵矿业集团、白沙煤电集团、资兴矿业集团、长沙矿业集团、湘潭矿业有限责任公司和湖南辰溪煤矿。其中前三家进入2005年全国煤炭工业100强企业行列。这6家企业集中主要省属煤炭资源，资产组成十分优良。据悉，组建后的湘煤集团拥有生产矿井50对，总资产为40亿元，3年后煤炭产量将达到1000万吨。... 该集团的组建，正式吹响了湖南省新一轮煤炭资源整合升级行动的号角。"
  From Google Translate: "Hunan Coal Group was reorganised from six state-owned key coal enterprises in Hunan Province: Lianshao Mining Group, Baisha Coal and Electricity Group, Zixing Mining Group, Changsha Mining Group, Xiangtan Mining Co., Ltd. and Hunan Chenxi Coal Mine. Among them, the first three entered the ranks of the top 100 enterprises in the national coal industry in 2005. These six companies concentrate mainly on provincial coal resources and have very good asset composition. It is reported that after establishment, the Xiang Coal Group has 50 pairs of production mines with total assets of 4 billion yuan. Coal output will reach 10 million tons in three years. ... The establishment of the group officially sounded the clarion call for a new round of coal resource integration and upgrading actions in Hunan Province."
5. Tang, Zhenwei 唐振伟 (2013-07-01). ""煤电互保"政府间博弈升级 "三西"煤深受其害. 湘煤集团并未从中受益" [The inter-governmental game on "mutual guarantee of coal and electricity" escalates, and coal in the Three West Regions is deeply affected by it. Hunan Coal Group did not benefit from this]. Securities Daily (in Chinese). p. C2.
  The article notes: "公开资料显示，在今年4月22日召开电煤运行形势座谈会上，湖南经信委副主任杨晓晋在会上要求火电企业要优先采购湘煤集团、资江煤业集团等省内生产的电煤"
  From Google Translate: "Public information shows that at a symposium on thermal coal operation situation held on April 22 this year, Yang Xiaojin, deputy director of Hunan Economic and Information Technology Commission, asked thermal power companies to give priority to purchasing electricity produced in the province such as Hunan Coal Group and Zijiang Coal Industry Group."
  The article notes: "5月，12家火电企业从省内煤矿企业购进电煤量有所提高，但从湘煤集团购进的煤量仍在逐步下降。上述数据显示，湖南省内最大的煤炭企业湘煤集团并未从“煤电互保”中受益。对此，有分析人士认为，湖南的“煤电互保”政策保护了事实上中小煤企，不利于淘汰落后产能。"
  From Google Translate: "In May, the amount of thermal coal purchased by 12 thermal power companies from coal mining companies in the province increased, but the amount of coal purchased from Xiang Coal Group was still gradually declining. The above data shows that Hunan Coal Group, the largest coal company in Hunan Province, has not benefited from the "coal and electricity mutual guarantee". In this regard, some analysts believe that Hunan's "coal and electricity mutual guarantee" policy actually protects small and medium-sized coal companies and is not conducive to the elimination of backward production capacity."
6. Li, Tieqiao 黎铁桥 (2009-03-25). "湘煤集团新疆勘探到百亿吨煤田将成为湖南新的能源供应基地" [Hunan Coal Group. Xinjiang has discovered 10 billion tons of coal fields and will become a new energy supply base in Hunan]. Changsha Evening News (in Chinese). p. A4.
  The article notes: "据介绍,湘煤集团于2008年底与新疆有关方面签署协议，获得在吐鲁番、哈密等地200亿吨煤炭资源开采权，并成立湘煤集团新疆能源有限公司。近日，湘煤集团在吐鲁番沙尔湖煤田钻井探煤,发现厚达151.14米的煤层。"
  From Google Translate: "According to reports, the Hunan Coal Group signed an agreement with relevant parties in Xinjiang at the end of 2008, obtaining the right to mine 20 billion tons of coal resources in Turpan, Hami and other places, and established the Hunan Coal Group Xinjiang Energy Co., Ltd. Recently, Hunan Coal Group was drilling for coal in the Shaerhu Coalfield in Turpan and discovered a 151.14-meter-thick coal seam."
7. "湘煤集团挖掘产能增产确保电煤供应" [Hunan Coal Group explores production capacity and increases production to ensure thermal coal supply]. 中经网 [China Economic Net] (in Chinese). 2008-07-21.
  The article notes: "作为我省基础能源供应主力的湘煤集团，克服年初冰灾带来的重大影响，在部分骨干矿井停产达30天的情况下，上半年仍供应电煤131.4万吨，比去年同期增加10.5万吨。冰灾期间，湘煤集团51对矿井中，有44对不同程度受损。"
  From Google Translate: "As the main provider of basic energy in our province, Xiang Coal Group overcame the major impact of the ice disaster at the beginning of the year. Even though some backbone mines were suspended for 30 days, it still supplied 1.314 million tons of thermal coal in the first half of the year, an increase of 105,000 tons over the same period last year. Ton. During the ice disaster, 44 of the 51 pairs of mines of the Xiang Coal Group were damaged to varying degrees."
8. Li, Junjie 李俊杰 (2016-02-15). Yan, Lu 閆璐; Du, Yanfei 杜燕飛 (eds.). "湘煤集團總經理李義成涉嫌違紀被查曾遭網友舉報" [Li Yicheng, general manager of Hunan Coal Group, was investigated for suspected disciplinary violations and was reported by netizens]. People's Daily (in Chinese). China News Service. Archived from the original on 2024-05-26. Retrieved 2024-05-26.
  The article notes: "湖南省煤業集團有限公司是經湖南省人民政府批准設立的大型省屬國有獨資企業，是全國煤炭50強企業，是該省政府確定的全省能源保障主平台和重點支持加快發展的企業。據悉，該公司於2006年6月19日挂牌成立，現旗下擁有全資、控股子公司37家，擁有煤礦總數60個，總設計生產能力3000萬噸/年。"
  From Google Translate: "Hunan Coal Industry Group Co., Ltd. is a large-scale provincial state-owned enterprise established with the approval of the Hunan Provincial People's Government. It is one of the top 50 coal enterprises in the country. It is the main platform for energy security in the province and an enterprise determined by the provincial government to focus on accelerating development. It is reported that the company was established on June 19, 2006. It now has 37 wholly-owned and holding subsidiaries, a total of 60 coal mines, and a total designed production capacity of 30 million tons per year."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Hunan Coal Group, or Xiangmei Group (simplified Chinese: 湘煤集团; traditional Chinese: 湘煤集團; pinyin: Xiāngméi Jítuán), full name Hunan Provincial Coal Industry Group (湖南省煤业集团有限公司), to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 09:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard: But where are the links for me to verify them? How can I confirm that these sources are reliable? Additionally, the majority of them are only a paragraph or two . How can this be considered in-depth coverage of the subject? These are trival mentions, Read WP:SIGCOV to know what In-depth coverage means. GrabUp - Talk 09:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are offline sources. The quotes I provided are not the full articles. For most of the articles, there is more coverage of the company that I did not quote. The quotes I provided are sufficient to demonstrate the company meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Significant coverage, which says: "The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability. Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization."

Cunard (talk) 10:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard: Offline articles is a very good excuse to my question, that how can I or someone verify them? Also, you can add whatever you want and justify them to establish notability. There is no proof that these coverages are from reliable independent secondary sources. GrabUp - Talk 10:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With the responses "a very good excuse" and "you can add whatever you want", there is nothing substantive I can or want to say in response. Cunard (talk) 10:32, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard: Hey, I want to know how and where you get these articles. I mean, obviously, you don't have all these printed copies in your home, so I just want to know where you search and get them. GrabUp - Talk 10:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the sources found by Cunard. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 03:47, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mx. Granger: May I know where you confirmed that these coverage are real and are from reliable secondary sources? GrabUp - Talk 04:14, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also feel that, as a reviewer, GrabUp should be more neutral and objective. At the beginning of this page, you said:

"I did WP:BEFORE and searched for independent reliable sources to establish the notability of the subject as per WP:GNG and WP:NCORP, but I found nothing that can establish notability. Here is a breakdown of cited sources: ..."

Let me put some words on your comments.
- 1: http://www.hnmyjt.com/Item/2.aspx (This is the official website of the Company and is WP:PRIMARY, so it can't establish notability, The full article is just rely on this source)
ctxz2323: But getting some data and facts, instead of self-flattering words, from there may be ok.
- 2: https://www.hunan.gov.cn/hnszf/hnyw/zwdt/201212/t20121210_4719900.html (A government site, can't really establish notability, Just listed hundreds of companies in China)
ctxz2323: Again, the citation was for a historical fact, i.e., to support the sentence "In 2009, Hunan Coal Group, China Telecom, and Datang Telecom Group jointly established Hunan Black Gold Times (湖南黑金时代).". And that is a provincial government webite, a very high one.
- 3: https://clb.org.hk/en/content/hunan-coalminers-strike-over-privatization-plans (Just Passing mention to Hunan Coal Group and the article is only about the "Strike" of the workers of the company, not about the company.
ctxz2323: Contributed by another editor, but I don't think it is useless.
- 4: https://caijing.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202107/20/WS60f66c85a3101e7ce975a86d.html (The article is talking about the history of coal in Hunan, no coverage of the Hunan Coal Group at all. Also, At the end, the article mentions:"(Author Liao Jianxiang is Secretary and Chairman of the Party Committee of Hunan Coal Group Co., Ltd.")
ctxz2323: The history of coal in Hunan is relevant to the Hunan Coal Group, as shown by its title "湘煤集团：汲取红色动能建设百年湘煤" (Google translate: "Xiang Coal Group: absorb red kinetic energy and build a century-old Hunan Coal Group".). And the source China Daily is maybe the largest English newspaper in China.
- 5: https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-05/22/content_5292722.htm (Government site, Even I skip that part, the article does not give in-depth coverage of the subject, it talk about the Jailed of Chairman of Hunan Coal Industry) GrabUp - Talk 12:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ctxz2323: From Xinhua News Agency? Its news is widely used even internationally.
On the whole, I agree that the wiki article is far from perfect, but not so bad as should be deleted. Ctxz2323 (talk) 08:21, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ctxz2323: Your breakdown does not provide any logic to pass WP:SIGCOV or WP:GNG. Passing mentions from government sites (primary sources) can’t establish notability. GrabUp - Talk 08:42, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These sources are just trival mentions as per WP:ORGTRIV. GrabUp - Talk 08:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ping didn't work, just so you know. I am assuming good faith that the quotes Cunard provided are real, not fake. The sources generally look like reliable WP:NEWSORGs. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, no proof or links; your vote is based on assumption. Thanks for your reply, but this does not convince me that these sources are reliable secondary sources. GrabUp - Talk 14:31, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reminding (though sounds a bit too tough).

I have just added 2 English sources accessible on the Net. Ctxz2323 (talk) 23:32, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ctxz2323: The first source is from Bloomberg, not a news coverage. Just a small page with intro of the company, not an in-depth coverage at all. The second source is from Wood Mac, an Analytic company, the article does not provide in-depth coverage just a summary and because it is an analytics, is fails under WP:ORGTRIV which says “standard notices, brief announcements, and routine coverage, such as:

of quarterly or annual financial results and earning forecasts,” GrabUp - Talk 03:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Sources 1 and 5 seem to be WP:NCORP qualifying from a glance, and thats enough to make the company pass the guideline. WP:OFFLINE sources are allowed to be used to meet notability guidelines, and if someone has reason to believe someone is making up sources they are happy to go to WP:ANI with evidence to discuss the matter further. Jumpytoo Talk 05:31, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jumpytoo: The first source is from Bloomberg; it's not a news article or anything similar, just a company page with one paragraph:
- Hunan Coal Group Co. Ltd. mines, processes, and distributes coal products. The Company produces anthracite coals, coking coals, lean coals, general bituminous coals, and other products.
Just this nothing else,
The second source is from CLB. The article is about the strike of the workers but does not provide in-depth coverage of the company. The article mentions:
- Several thousand workers at the Hunan Coal Industry Group have entered the tenth day of a strike in a protest over the company’s proposed privatization and stock exchange listing plans.
- The strike began on 22 August when managers at the group’s Jinzhushan mine in central Hunan tried to force miners starting their shift to sign lay-off compensation agreements that took no account of how long they had worked at the mine. Those who refused to sign the agreement were not allowed to work.
In these two paragraphs, the first mentions Hunan Coal Industry Group, and the second reports that they are forcing workers to work. How do these meet WP:NCORP? This is not significant or in-depth coverage as per WP:SIGCOV. GrabUp - Talk 09:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding offline sources, there is a section named “Challenging offline sources” that you can read. It allows me to challenge offline sources, and so I am challenging these offline sources. GrabUp - Talk 09:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, I mean Cunard's sourcing list, not whatever sourcing is in the article. The sources I mention specifically contain negative coverage which generally have the NCORP required intellectual independence. Per the link you provided on challenging online sources, They might even be able to provide you a scan or an excerpt from that source, which Cunard already did in their vote. And as per WP:OSO, If an editor seeking deletion believes the creator placed fictitious references in the article to make a hoax seem legitimate, the burden of proof is on the one seeking deletion. Jumpytoo Talk 09:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just google "Hunan Coal Group" on the net, and you will see quite a bit coverage hard to ignore. Ctxz2323 (talk) 01:26, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ctxz2323: I have already provided an analysis of the cited sources. If you would like, you can share your ‘Hard to Ignore’ sources, and I will gladly analyze them for you. GrabUp - Talk 03:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Takeo Saeki[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not significant enough for standalone article. Possible merge/redirect to Ju-on but no sourced info to merge. Boleyn (talk) 12:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Film, and Japan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:25, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge as WP:ATD. The sourcing here is severely lacking. For this one article, I am more willing to grant that sources could exist, given its roots in Asia. A merge would allow us to WP:PRESERVE some amount of history and content, in case sources are found at a later time. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:20, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:14, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Shamil Rural District. The page and its editors do have a questionable history. Relisting does not look like a good use of time or effort. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 19:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poshtkuh-e Shamil[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I originally nominated this for PROD with the following justification, which I largely stand by: None of the cited sources clearly indicate a place by this name in Farsi, although there are partial title matches. There is no corresponding page on fa.wiki. This is likely a GNIS ghost or some other error. Sources all relate to Hormozgan province, but there's no useful mention at that page that could justify a redirect.

Now, since opening a PROD for this page with the above reasoning, a new account has repeatedly attempted to refbomb the page with a mountain poorly formatted citations, most of which have the same aforementioned problem of referring to a Poshtkuh (پشتکوه) but not a Poshtkuh-e Shamil (پشتکوه شمیل). However, I do note that at least one of the new sources does refer to "Poshtkuh, Shamil Region" (پشتکوه بخش شمیل) [4]. The level of coverage is still such that I think we fall short of meeting WP:GNG or WP:NGEO--we have basically no verifiable claims about the region to build an article around, and it is not self-evident that this is a distinct, recognized populated place. "Poshtkuh" essentially means "behind the mountain" in Farsi, and could easily be an informal descriptor rather than an actual defined place. Thus, I think that a redirect to Shamil Rural District and extended-confirmed protection of the page is appropriate. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 13:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iran. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 13:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nom. The creator was blocked for sockpuppetry so this article was likely to have been an innocent looking geostub intended to get their edit count up. Mccapra (talk) 19:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Jeevan TV[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It doesn't appear to meet WP:ORG / WP:GNG. 1st AfD was no consensus, low participation (2). Boleyn (talk) 16:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Television, Entertainment, and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It proves its Notability quality in media/television WP:NTV and WP:GNG, Jeevan TV one of the first TV channels from Kerala, India ~ Spworld2 (talk) 9:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mocha (JavaScript framework)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 18:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unit.js[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 18:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

QUnit[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 18:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP Is this some kind of joke? QUnit was originally part of JQuery, and as a standalone its most recent release was February 2024. Even if it's not used much these days, it's historically significant and should be kept on that basis alone. Michaelmalak (talk) 19:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated Testing Framework[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 18:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

API Sanity Checker[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 18:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LDRA Testbed[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 18:14, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, Software, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lorenzo D'Agostini[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This feels like a prime example of WP:TOOSOON, so I would suggest draftification. There was some coverage of him in Italian press upon his move to Lazio's youth system in 2023, but nothing but match reports appear since then. Anwegmann (talk) 17:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Italy, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Morgan Williams (footballer, born 2004)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV, as everything I could find is either South London local press or directly from club websites. Anwegmann (talk) 17:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, England, and Wales. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Michael McConkey[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of an as yet unelected political candidate, not properly sourced as passing WP:NPOL. As always, candidates do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates per se -- the notability test at NPOL is winning the election and thereby holding office, while unelected candidates must either (a) have preexisting notability for other reasons independently of their candidacy, or (b) show credible reasons why their candidacy is a special case of much greater significance than most other people's candidacies, in some way that would pass the ten year test. But this demonstrates neither of those things, and is referenced 50 per cent to primary sources that are not support for notability at all, and 50 per cent to a tiny blip of coverage in the context of him tangentially winning a tidy but not massive sum of money in the lottery, which is not in and of itself a reason why his candidacy would be special.
Obviously no prejudice against recreation in November if he wins the seat, but nothing here is grounds for an article to already exist now. Bearcat (talk) 17:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and North Carolina. Bearcat (talk) 17:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bearcat. I came across this article previously and would have nominated it for deletion but did not then have time to do a proper before. JSFarman (talk) 19:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Medicine, Nebraska, Ohio, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Dunn (defender)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm a bit unsure about this one, as he seemed to have a rather robust career, but it was entirely at the non-league, semi-pro level. There doesn't seem to be much of any WP:SIGCOV outside of this local newspaper coverage. I'd like to see what consensus is here, as it feels like a "delete" for me, but I'm curious what others think. Anwegmann (talk) 17:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh Shu-hua[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No observed changes in notability for WP:GNG, WP:SINGER, WP:BANDMEMBER since Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yeh Shuhua in 2021. The previous AfD resulted in redirect, this is the revision prior to the AfD closure. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 17:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the references show that the subject meets the following criteria. The references has the person as the main subject and not just a passing mention as part of the group.

1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent of the musician or ensemble itself.

A big difference from the other version is a reliance on published sources like news reports and magazines rather than Youtube videos. Firezzasd (talk) 18:10, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't see how "reliance on published sources like news reports and magazines" is of any differences to the pointers raised by Explicit in the previous AfD, pretty close in my opinion. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 18:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

can you link the previous AfD discussion, so I can see what points were raised? Firezzasd (talk) 18:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Already linked, above ^. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 18:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The main difference is that discussion is from June 2021. There's more reporting on the subject in the last three years, as evident in the references. I think if the concern is independent notability, that's no longer an issue as compared to back then. Firezzasd (talk) 18:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, Dance, South Korea, and Taiwan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of NFL Championship Game broadcasters[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTTVGUIDE applies here. Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to the most ardent NFL fans. Fails WP:LISTN. Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE. As with sources per WP:RS besides those unsourced; besides being minimal, none of the two are extant, not helping this list to assert notability. SpacedFarmer (talk) 17:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, American football, Lists, and United States of America. SpacedFarmer (talk) 17:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This would have to have been from a while ago, so sources could exist on newspapers.com. However, this article stands as WP:LISTCRUFT and mainly consists of WP:OR. Conyo14 (talk) 17:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I have agreed with the previous AfDs directed at lists of broadcasters of various college bowl games and conference championship games, but there is room in the encyclopedia for a list when it is about the biggest game of the year. In recent history, that's the Super Bowl, and nobody has questioned the notability of List of Super Bowl broadcasters. The Super Bowl is not only the pinnacle of careers on the field but also in the broadcast booth. The best of the best are tabbed to broadcast the Super Bowl, and a list of its broadcasters serves a valid purpose as a navigational list. In the pre-Super Bowl era, the NFC Championship Game was the pinnacle, and the same rationale applies. Cbl62 (talk) 08:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC).[reply]

My take: There is room for these lists in a legitimate encyclopedia if limited to top-level events. E.g., List of Super Bowl broadcasters, List of World Series broadcasters, List of NBA Finals broadcasters, List of Wimbledon broadcasters, List of Indianapolis 500 broadcasters, List of Stanley Cup Finals broadcasters. Being the broadcaster at such an event is the pinnacle for sports broadcasters, and the lists serve a useful navigational function in tracking sports broacasting history at the highest level. It is when we allow these things to creep to the middle and lower levels that we risk dippig into fancruft. Cbl62 (talk) 09:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the Super Bowl though. I'd be willing to change my !vote if sources are found regarding these specific game(s)' broadcasting crews. Conyo14 (talk) 16:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The NFL Championship Game was the top championship game in pro football during its time. The Super Bowl is that today. Cbl62 (talk) 16:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody can doubt that. The can't be said for the one about the FA Cup final, Moto GP, Ligue 1, Serie A, Bundesliga and the French Open (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of French Open broadcasters (2nd nomination)) SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per Cbl62, being what was at the time the biggest American football game of the year. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:55, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can all agree with that. This is not intended to be a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT but I wish people stop using "the biggest sporting event of the year" as an excuse to keep. SpacedFarmer (talk) 07:57, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SpacedFarmer: You wish people would stop referencing the fact that a list is based on a notable event, and the notability of said event, as a reason/relevant point when voting to keep something? That's a silly concept and definitely not an "excuse". Hey man im josh (talk) 16:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Reliable sources discussing the broadcasters for this game as a group seemingly do not exist, and as such, this article fails to meet WP:LISTN. Notability is WP:NOTINHERETED. Let'srun (talk) 19:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A list can serve valid navigational purpose and not have sources discussing all entries as a group. In any event, here (link) is a piece by the Pro Football Researchers Association that does exactly what you ask. Cbl62 (talk) 21:14, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is a good start, but I'd need to see at least one more source like that before I'd be inclined to switch my vote. Let'srun (talk) 02:06, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, this functions as a navigational list such that we don't need sources dealing with all entries as a group (even though such a source has been found). This was the top pro football game in the world in the years prior to the Super Bowl (where nobody questions the validity of the List of Super Bowl broadcasters) and has equal historical value. Cbl62 (talk) 10:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per Cbl62. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:04, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 04:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cbl62. Rlendog (talk) 16:39, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the problem with this article is that it only gives a list format of who did play-by-play, color commentating, and also on-field reporting. The notes section is actually much more reliable as a History of the NFL championship broadcasts article startup than maintaining it as a list. However, with only one good source from Cbl62, it doesn't seem like this article maintains WP:LISTN. Saying, "it was the biggest event of the time, surely sources exist...", please provide more and I will change my !vote. Conyo14 (talk) 07:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Global Project Against Hate and Extremism[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not at all at G4, but the issues raised at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Project against Hate and Extremism of the citation of reports vs. WP:ORG level coverage remain true. Bringing it back here for discussion. Star Mississippi 20:00, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Internet, and Alabama. Star Mississippi 20:00, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy ping to all participants in the prior AfD: @MarioGom, Alsee, Cullen328, LordPeterII, DanielRigal, TheresNoTime, and Idoghor Melody: Star Mississippi 20:03, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As of now (permalink), sources 1 to 5 are not independent and do not count towards notability. The rest of the sources cite reports by the organization, and some (like the one from apublica.org) go quite into depth into the reports, but still there does not seem to be in-depth coverage about the organization itself. It does not seem to meet WP:ORGCRIT, but the content of sources 6 to 10 would be due in various other articles. MarioGom (talk) 20:14, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep to be honest I only found out about the previously deleted article when creating a redirect at GPAHE. I think the deletion in 2022 was adequate, but the organization's publications have since generated numerous news pieces including from CNN Portugal and Diário de Notícias, besides the above mentioned apublica.org. While these sources don't exclusively cover GPAHE itself, they do mention the organization extensively (at least one paragraph in each of those, and several in DN), they're entirely based on GPAHE's reports and cite them throughout. IMHO this is enough to attest significant coverage while clearly being independent, reliable and secondary. Rkieferbaum (talk) 20:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as I also recommended in the 2022 AfD. There has been no significant change in the quality of the sourcing that I can see. According to WP:NORG, The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability. Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization. Such coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements. I do not believe that the coverage of this organization rises to the level required by the relevant notability guideline, and I believe that Alsee analyzed the matter very thoroughly in 2022. Cullen328 (talk) 22:52, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cullen328: with all due respect, I think you're reading too much into that particular part of WP:NORG. Firstly, "well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements" - at least the three pieces I mentioned above, and many many others, do go well beyond brief mentions. They're not news pieces about something that were written independently of the organiation and then cite it in passing somewhere in the middle of the article. They're entire pieces built around the organization's reports and that give substantial coverage to the organization itself. The fact that this coverage isn't about the history of the organization isn't all there is to it. The pieces are about the organization's work and that cannot be ignored. A Pública's piece mentions GPAHE eight times throughout the text, as does Diário de Notícias. Surely that does not qualify as "brief mentions". Lastly, I call your attention to WP:NONPROFIT: the group must act nationally or internationally and, more importantly, "The organization has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the organization." I find that having their work featured in full pieces from outlets in Portugal, Brazil, the US, the UK and other places should be enough to cover both of those points. Mind you that none of the three articles I mentioned were published during the previous discussion: they're from jun/23, jan/24 and apr/24. Rkieferbaum (talk) 00:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rkieferbaum, we disagree about how WP:NORG should be interpreted. That's OK. I stand by my recommendation, but if consensus develops to keep the article, so be it. Cullen328 (talk) 00:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't !vote last time but I think it is a weak keep this time. There are 70 hits in Google Scholar and several pages of Google News hits showing that academics and Reliable Sources take them seriously and are happy to use their research as a source but I don't see anybody covering the organisation itself as a primary subject, which is what it would take to move it from a weak keep to a full strength keep. If anybody can find something like that, even if it is not in English, then I think that would secure the keep. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:38, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Numerous references in reliable sources, including several from scientific publications available at Google Scholar. Direct and extensive coverage at some of the most well known Portuguese newspapers, like Público, DN, Sábado, etc. I don't have any doubts about its relevance. Darwin ^Ahoy! 14:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I feel resonance with User:DanielRigal as there seem to be yet further articles that quote the organization. If increasing numbers of prominent publications mention the organization, then perhaps there is a point at which the subject should be considered sufficiently notable, perhaps. Some additional articles mentioning them that are not used in the article:

CapnPhantasm (talk) 04:31, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 04:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per Cullen; the issues from the prior AfD persist. The fact that they were mentioned in a couple newspaper stories doesn't really seem to change this. If not deleted, then this article at a minimum needs to be stubified -- it is unbelievably promotional and reads like a press release. The organization's mission is to strengthen and educate a diverse global community committed to exposing and countering racism, bigotry, and hate, and associated violence; and to promote the human rights values that support flourishing, inclusive societies and democracies? Holy freaking Christmas, what a mess. jp×g 🗯️ 01:09, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hazari Gonj Hamidia Fazil Madrasah[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Sources do not demonstrate notability. Nothing indicates that this high school is notable in the article. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 17:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Bangladesh. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 17:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baalveer Returns[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can't see it passes WP: GNG. All available sourcing are just about the actors. Proposing MERGE to Baalveer or DELETE. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2-Pyridone (data page)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is not an article what so ever, why we need such a data page on Wikipedia? Requesting merge to 2-Pyridone or move it to Wikidata if possible. -Lemonaka 16:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -Lemonaka 16:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with 2-Pyridone: Most of this would go in an infobox on the chemical, the rest is too specialized for Wikipedia. Oaktree b (talk) 19:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ICanHazPDF[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A hashtag used 4 times in 2015 with two fluff pieces written about it fails GNG. Remsense诉 15:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Academic journals. Remsense诉 15:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Not sure where "4 times in 2015" is coming from, as it appears to continue to be used as recently as last week, and it receives in-depth coverage in academic literature, eg [5]. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The BBC and Atlanic articles are pretty in-depth, not puff pieces, and discuss the subject as being part of wider issues around copyright and open access, I'd consider that to be SIGCOV. -- D'n'B-t -- 18:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bajirao's Konkan Campaign[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previous AfD was closed as no consensus. I have discovered that the sole author is a block-evading sock, which was not considered in the first discussion, and I would caution against extending any AGF on sources that cannot be verified, so relisting. Pinging previous participants RangersRus, ImperialAficionado and closer Star Mississippi. See original discussion for original filer's rationale. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, India, Portugal, and England. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. The page has been created and edited mostly by the block evading account and have no substantial edits by others. RangersRus (talk) 16:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per AfD1 nom and GS's reasoning above. And if this should be done speedily, please don't use my N/C close as a reason not to, there was just no input forthcoming there. Star Mississippi 22:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian Wikipedia[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG 48JCL^TALK 14:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albania-related deletion discussions. 48JCL^TALK 14:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The nomination is not satisfactory. One English word plus one abbreviation - when the article is being nominated for the third time, you have to follow up on the last discussions and delve into the arguments. You should also explain why the sources already in the articles do not count towards GNG. Geschichte (talk) 14:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Georges Charmoille[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have been draftifying some articles about 120 years old gymnasts with very insufficient sourcing. This one I'm sending straight to AFD. The log indicates that a WP:LUGSTUB used to occupy the article title Georges Charmoille, before being moved to Gustave. In other words, there seems to have been unreliable sources somewhere along the way regarding his first name. There could be a situation where two brothers were gymnasts, but since this new article doesn't address that discrepancy at all, I consider it completely worthless. The Gustave article currently sits at Draft:Gustave Charmoille, but Georges can't be redirected there since redirects from mainspace to draftspace aren't allowed. Therefore: just nuke this one for emphatically failing WP:SPORTCRIT and problems with WP:V. Geschichte (talk) 10:27, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Does Wikipedia:NOLYMPICS apply here? There are a lot of Olympics books that name him as a bronze medalist in 1906. For example[6][7][8]
This should be transcluded to the Olympics deletion sorting list. If I knew how, I'd do it myself. Oblivy (talk) 11:08, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oblivy As I mentioned above, there are serious uncertainties about who "Georges" Charmoille really is. We already have a draft for Gustave, who is recognized as the correct name for the Olympian by Olympedia, at least. Geschichte (talk) 13:06, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The two sources at Gustave are websites that lack citations for their assertions. archive.org has one hit for Gustave, seemingly about a dance performance. It has 38 hits about Georges, admittedly all post-1980. The official site lists Georges as competing but not medalling in 1908. Oblivy (talk) 13:32, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Olympedia seems to say he's known by both names? Seems very likely notable if he's the WORLD champion gymnast - deletion would seem to leave him as the only champion without an article per Template:NavigationWorldChampionsArtisticGymnasticsMenHorizontalBar? BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:50, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Note that the draft at "Gustave" was also previously "Georges". I am sure we could ask the Olympedia team for their research on the matter to better know which name should be the article title - and for sources to use in it. I don't have significant time to do it, so I am neutral on whether the content of this article should be moved to the current draft article likely about the same person or not, but if it's going to take some time for clarity, it probably should. Kingsif (talk) 22:42, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep on its face, he meets the WP:NSPORTS requirement for medalling at an Olympic games. I recognize the possible argument that the 1906 games weren't really the Olympics (note old discussion here that did not reach a consensus) but they were considered the Olympics at the time and so the same spirit of best-in-the-world seems to apply.
Gustave vs. Georges seems irrelevant to this discussion. I don't think one uncited claim on a website is enough to discard the many books listing him under Georges. If necessary, create a redirect from Gustave and mention the controversy (if it can be supported by RS) on this page. Oblivy (talk) 13:17, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 09:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep although there doesn't seem much to say. That the first name is uncertain seems to me to be irrelevant, it is entirely possible he used both names or one was his common name and the other his official name. JMWt (talk) 10:29, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary: the uncertainty about the first name pertains to the very root of the WP:V issue: who was this person? It's not up to us to speculate on which name was what, we need reliable sources. Geschichte (talk) 09:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm having trouble understanding the verifiability issue. We have a number of record books with the Georges name in them. And the official Olympic website says Georges as the principal name.
On the other hand, we have the secondary name on the Olympics site and a website associating that name with him. Anything else? Is there a reliable source that is clearly him and gives Gustave as the principal name? If someone added a sentence or two discussing name controversy, wouldn't the full picture be disclosed? Oblivy (talk) 12:19, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Lack of sourcng... I tried a search in the BNF newspaper archives, this was all that came up [9] second to last paragraph in the last column on the right. A person with the same name died in a torpedo attack. Oaktree b (talk) 14:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 14:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 13:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SurrealDB[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An advertisement. Extensive use of primary sources, and of obviously non-independent material. Such few legitimate sources as are cited are being used solely to bolster the promotional content. The 'history and development' section says almost nothing about either the history (what history? it's new) or development of the product, instead focussing on the funding of the parent company - which isn't the subject of the article, and would appear not to meet WP:CORP criteria. Absolutely nothing in the article remotely resembles independent commentary on the merits of the database itself, failing WP:SIGCOV. Instead, we have a promotional lede, an off-topic 'history', and a banal list of 'technical features', much of which could probably be applied to any database created since the 1980s (Or possibly 1950s, e.g. "Supports basic types like booleans, strings, and numerics...") A Google search finds nothing of any consequence in regards to useful in-depth RS coverage. It exists. Some people seem to be using it. I can't see any reason why Wikipedia should be assisting the company in selling it though. AndyTheGrump (talk) 09:54, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business and Computing. AndyTheGrump (talk) 09:54, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SurrealDB Github stars demonstrating rapid growth
Keep - clearly a notable database as per this "github stars" metric demonstrating developer/popularity growth, putting it amongst the likes of MongoDB. It's company has been also extensively covered by TechCrunch.
No issue with the article being improved/edited to remove promotional material, but your statement regarding the "technical features" is false, as a developer, I am unaware of many databases offering this level of multi-modality. At worst, this is merely WP:NOTJUSTYET and should be drafted instead of deleted. Mr Vili talk 13:29, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, currently the company has nothing to gain by "selling" it on Wikipedia, the database is open sourced.

However, the company does plan to release a cloud offering in the future but until then - I see no issue in having this page as it provides valuable information for developers looking to learn more about SurrealDB. It's likely this topic will continue to increase in notability. Mr Vili talk 13:44, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding 'Github stars', see the discussion on Talk:SurrealDB. WP:OR graphics based on 'favourites' amongst random self-selected Github users are in no shape or form of any significance when assessing subject notability, as you have already been told. And as for the company having nothing to gain, I only need point to what you yourself wrote in the article: Investor Matt Turck from FirstMark sees SurrealDB competing in the growing database-as-a-service market, projected to be worth $24.8 billion by 2025. That's a rather large 'nothing'. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:57, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The quote about the database service industry market potential has been removed as it was taken from an article where Matt Turck announced their investment and could come across as marketing. This article should be kept as it accurately describes their company and maintains a neutral point of view. Briggs 360 (talk) 12:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need to distinguish between an article about specific software, which this is supposed to be, and an article about the company. We have specific notability criteria for the latter, WP:CORP, which I don't think would be met - and if it were, we'd have a separate article on it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think usually we'd use CORP for commercial software anyway, by way of WP:PRODUCT, that's where WP:NSOFT links to. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'd forgotten that WP:CORP is the relevant notability criteria for software. Which doesn't alter the fact that articles are supposed to be about one subject, not two. If the article is about the software, it has to be demonstrated that the software is notable through significant independent coverage discussing the software, not the company. If it were about the company, we'd need significant coverage of that - and then we'd write an article about the company. The article as it stands consists entirely of poorly-sourced and promotional content regarding the product, with a 'History and development' section tossed into the middle which doesn't discuss the history or development of the product at all. It is a confusing mess, trying to concoct notability for one thing by describing another.

Incidentally, if you intend to edit the article further, as you did yesterday, you really need to read WP:RS first. Citing something like this [10] does absolutely nothing to demonstrate notability. It is pure and unadulterated promotional fluff: "The event will feature a keynote address by Tobie Morgan Hitchcock, a visionary in the field of data science and technology, who will delve into the intricate details of how SurrealDB’s latest database offering stands poised to reshape industries across the globe." That is a press release, or a close paraphrase of one. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I... don't think I've edited the page, AndyTheGrump? You may have confused me with someone else. I do have it on my watchlist for some reason though. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, apologies. I've clearly confused you with Briggs 360, who posted the 'Keep' above, and then edited the article. I'll strike out the bit about sourcing. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess since I'm here I may as well do one of these:

ORGCRIT assess table

Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Secondary?	Overall value toward ORGCRIT
Peyton, Antony (2022-07-21). "Tech Startup SurrealDB Goes Live with Serverless Cloud Database". eWeek UK. Retrieved 2024-01-19. Peyton, Antony (2021-09-29). "SurrealDB Keeps it Real with Serverless Cloud Database Launch". eWeek UK. Retrieved 2024-01-19.	Appears to be derrived from quotes and other PR material	– Skipped full assessment due to ORGIND and ORGDEPTH fails. Though, leaning no	Launch announcement falling under WP:ORGTRIV	Inherits ORGIND failure
Barron, Jenna (2024-05-10). "SD Times Open-Source Project of the Week: SurrealDB". SD Times. Retrieved 2024-05-17.	Seems like a media release again, but again, moot by the RS quickfail	First thing I notice here was the about page linking to D2 Emerge... We can't use a marketing mag whose primary purpose is to enhance your brand visibility among the most important influencers in IT today.
Wiggers, Kyle (2023-01-04). "SurrealDB raises $6M for its database-as-a-service offering". TechCrunch. Retrieved 2024-01-19.		WP:TECHCRUNCH, not one of the few exceptions	Funding announcement
"SurrealDB launch marks monumental milestone in the world of data management". UK Tech News. 2023-09-15. Retrieved 2024-01-19.	Literally a press release		Launch announcement
Wood, Anna. "London's tech scene gets a reboot". Startups Magazine. Retrieved 2024-01-19.		Leaning no
Šelmeci, Roman (6 Nov 2023). "SurrealDB, AWS DynamoDB and AWS Lambda". Sudolabs.	Short circuit	Blogs aren't considered RS	At first glance
"SurrealDB: Open source scalable graph database has big potential". devmio - Software Know-How. 2022-08-23. Retrieved 2024-01-19.	Seems to be mostly quotes from the announcement	Same as above
Citations to their own website
Team, TechRound (2024-04-25). "Meet Tobie Morgan Hitchcock, CEO & Co-Founder Of SurrealDB". TechRound. Retrieved 2024-05-17.	Interview with no secondary content
Vrcic, Tea (2024-03-06). "10 fast growing UK startups to watch in 2024 and beyond!". EU-Startups. Retrieved 2024-05-17.	probably not, but not assessed	No, again, this is not a NEWSORG, this is barely even WP:TRADES
Maguire, Chris (2023-07-25). "Huckletree to open two new London hubs". BusinessCloud. Retrieved 2024-01-19. (Essentially the same announcement also at "London's first Web3 Hub opens its doors". Bdaily Business News. 2023-03-16. Retrieved 2024-05-19.)		Dubious	... Why is this even in here?
Team, TechRound (2023-09-11). "SurrealDB: A Quantum Leap in Database Technology". TechRound. Retrieved 2024-05-17.	This is a press release
"Top 70+ startups in Database as a Service (DBaaS) - Tracxn". tracxn.com. 2024-04-05. Retrieved 2024-05-17.		...
On to the BEFORE results not in the article! Starting with: "Cloud, privacy and AI: Trends defining the future of data and databases". Sifted. Retrieved 2024-05-19.	Sponsored	Honestly I think we should take a closer look at most of our articles with Sifted as a source
Emison, Joseph (2023). Serverless as a game changer: How to get the most out of the cloud (1 ed.). Hoboken: Pearson Education, Inc. p. 156. ISBN 978-0-13-739262-9.		At least this one is an RS
Lengweiler, David; Vogt, Marco; Schuldt, Heiko (June 2023). "MMSBench-Net: Scenario-Based Evaluation of Multi-Model Database Systems". Proceedings of the 34th GI-Workshop on Foundations of Databases (Grundlagen von Datenbanken).	– Technically fails ORGIND but honestly I'd be willing to give a pass here	Not entirely convinced of GvDB but I'll give it a tick	– Marginal, we'd mostly be looking at 3.2 here	3.2 is fine	—
Jara Córcoles, Ángel Manuel (2024-01-08). "SurrealDB-La base de datos del futuro?".		Honestly this would probably be a great source if we considered Bachelor's theses RS, but we don't
Swami, Shubham; Aryal, Santosh; Bhowmick, Sourav S.; Dyreson, Curtis (2023). Almeida, João Paulo A.; Borbinha, José; Guizzardi, Giancarlo; Link, Sebastian; Zdravkovic, Jelena (eds.). "Using a Conceptual Model in Plug-and-Play SQL" (PDF). Conceptual Modeling. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland: 145–161. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-47262-6_8. ISBN 978-3-031-47262-6.			Passing mention

I can't see anything that clearly meets WP:ORGCRIT as per my evaluation above, so I'm going to have to go with delete (or, sure, draftify). Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:08, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a new source which appears to be WP:SIGCOV. Could you add it to the table. @Alpha3031 Mr Vili talk 02:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Smells like GenAI CLOP of a press release to me @Mr vili, are you sure you want to submit that? Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alpha3031 Could you please add https://dbdb.io/db/surrealdb to your assessment, I will be adding this to the article Mr Vili talk 04:34, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus, more input needed
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 05:26, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I am curious, why can't the dozens of courses, docs and high variety of SurrealDB guides that are unaffiliated with SurrealDB be used as independent, reliable, secondary significant sources of coverage? From a quick google, there's at least dozens of sites talking about SurrealDB from a developer/integrations perspective?

Sources like [11] [12] Mr Vili talk 04:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think our evaluation of such sources are sufficiently divergent that it would not be useful for me to put it in the table. Instead, I think I am going to kick it over to the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Alpha3031 (t • c) 04:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating the discussion Mr Vili talk 00:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

weak Delete for now because the sources don't look reliable enough. Like actual news articles. But I will check tomorrow or the day after to make sure. Freedun (yippity yap) 10:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 13:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I concur with Alpha3031's assessment of the sources identified for this subject. That we're even considering this, an "official government organization of the Government of Lumina" ([13]), as a reliable source is a rather damning sign of non-notability. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. With the nom, who was the only Delete view here, switching to Keep, there's no point in keeping this open any longer. Owen× ☎ 13:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Serbian Rugby League Cup[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreferenced, fails notabilty Mn1548 (talk) 13:05, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 May 16. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:25, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Alternative merge and redirect to Serbian Rugby League. Mn1548 (talk) 13:43, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- My preference however is to delete, given the state of the article, and lack of information on the competition format, and lack of context of how it fits into the Serbian season. Mn1548 (talk) 13:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Rugby league, and Serbia. Owen× ☎ 14:19, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are some sources available in English, European Rugby League has match reports for the finals from 2014 to 2017 and 2021, also a preview of the 2021 final which gives a bit of background history. These could be enough to establish notability. The Serbian RL website (in Serbian) also has lists of winners and of finals, but some data is missing, and there is nothing about an international cup. Due to the lack of match details, such as team lists and scorers, the article could be reformatted as a simple wikitable based on what can be verified. EdwardUK (talk) 16:33, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou, that page looks alot nicer. 😊 Mn1548 (talk) 13:40, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
New opinion Thanks to EdwardUK I think there are sufficient sources to keep the article. Mn1548 (talk) 14:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 04:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect – Per @Mn1548. Svartner (talk) 22:42, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - all content has citations and there appear to be enough sources to indicate notability. EdwardUK (talk) 05:00, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 13:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Rajan Simkhada[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It reflects poorly on us to host blatant spam like this. I went in to clean it up but couldn't find sources to support a Wikipedia biography. Most links are dead but those that I could access didn't support the claims or cover him in any depth. The is WP:UPE spam and the subject fails WP:GNG. Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Businesspeople, and Nepal. Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Though the references presented in article from reference no.7 to 10 is reliable and independent to the subject but I didn't find any significant coverage on him to establish notability. Fade258 (talk) 03:50, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prasads Multiplex[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Borderline G11, no indication of notability or significance for this IMAX theater, Sourcing isn't of WP:ORG level depth Star Mississippi 12:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Organizations, and India. Star Mississippi 12:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Independent coverage in rather reliable sources, significant and in depth, about this multiplex, and backing the claim that it houses the biggest screen in India! (other sources claim it is one of the world's largest 3D IMax). So, yes, there are various indications of significance and notability and it seems to meet WP:GNG. A redirect to Culture_of_Hyderabad#Film is imv absolutely warranted anyway. Opposed to deletion. (G11? "exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopedia articles, rather than advertisements. If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion." So basically, borderline G11 is not G11, if it was just that the tone and content may have been partially promotional, Afds are not for cleanup and given existing coverage, this potential issue was easily fixed; added 2 refs and trimmed the page but this can evidently be improved and expanded, thank you) -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Telangana-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Campaigns of Nader Shah[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article doesn't have any source for its notability. There's no source explicitly mentioning "Naderian Wars" or "Campaigns of Nader Shah" with its fictitious timeline. Clearly it's full of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH mess, It's just impersonating Napoleonic Wars. Based.Kashmiri ^(🗨️) 12:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I looked at the equivalent articles on other wikis and most are barely sourced spam but the Italian one is extensively written and has numerous sources. I don’t think the nominator has clearly established that no sources use this term. Mccapra (talk) 13:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Iran. Shellwood (talk) 15:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I find it a bit ironic that the nominator themself just recently made an article that is exactly the way they have described this one [14], whose deletion [15] they are opposing. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mountasser Hachem[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

So usual drill, CU-blocked UPE, some random awards and interviews and whatnot but no actual coverage outside the usual SPIP. Might have A7ed but I figured AfD would be easier given the "awards". Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, Technology, and Lebanon. Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Promotional profile refbombed with earlier promotional efforts. Mccapra (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Thompson (figure skater)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable figure skater despite one national championship win (for Great Britain). Nothing since retirement. Google search yields nothing but wikis, scoring databases, and one article mentioning that the European Championships where he finished in 25th place were held at the same rink where he trained. Big whoop. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Skating, and England. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or redirect I deprodded this with the rationale "This should be merged or redirected, but there are several plausible targets and I don't know enough about the topic area to unilaterally decide which is best." and I stand by that comment. I oppose straight deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tomáš Ďurica[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is another long-unsourced article of a Slovak men's footballer named Tomáš, whose career is mostly confined to clubs from lower league football clubs as well, before disappearing in 2011. I have searched on Google using a few keywords (e.g. "Tomáš Ďurica futbolista" and "Tomáš Ďurica Žilina"), but couldn't find any in-depth coverage of him that would meet WP:GNG. Best secondary sources I found were interviews from 2003, 2022, and 2023 – the latter two of which are paywalled. Clara A. Djalim (talk) 11:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovakia. Clara A. Djalim (talk) 11:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. "mostly confined to clubs from lower league football" refers to the swansong of his career. The main part of his career took place until 2004 and included a spell in Russia. Seems notable, but it's not that easy finding good stuff. I found some of the same sources you did: [16] [17] [18] [19] A search in Russian would be for Томаш Дюрица. Geschichte (talk) 16:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tushy (company)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

So as I mentioned on my AfD for their CEO, here I am. There were... quite the volume of WP:PRODUCTREV to get through, but nothing with significant coverage of the company, and barely anything on any specific product. Though this was not the primary focus, I do not believe any individual product of theirs is notable either, even ignoring questions of ORGIND or RS. The coverage of their events would seem to be excluded on WP:SPIP. I don't see any plausible way to meet WP:NCORP here. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Companies, and New York. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: Sources 1 and 34 in the article are RS per Cite Highlighter and provide some coverage about the company. The rest help at least meet BASIC, some more extensive than others, but we should have enough. Oaktree b (talk) 19:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BASIC does not apply to companies, only people. But still they may qualify. I am gonna have a deeper look. Hkkingg (talk) 22:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: based on present citations including dfdnews, People, Self.com, Digital Trends, Bidet Genius, and tech Crunch.Hkkingg (talk) 22:52, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vidya Gajapathi Raju Singh[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP of “ a prominent figure known for her multifaceted contributions to various fields including women's associations, charitable endeavors, sports, fitness and journalism. She is also the founder of Sumyog Wedding Planners, President of the International Women's Association, and also the President of Soroptomist International.” I don’t see anything that makes this subject notable and the article appears to serve a mainly promotional purpose. Mccapra (talk) 09:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and India. Mccapra (talk) 09:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Andhra Pradesh-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Balasubramanian Prabhakaran[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Twice speedy deleted under G11 this has been recreated with marginal sourcing and does not seem clearly notable to me. Bringing here for consensus. Mccapra (talk) 09:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Mccapra (talk) 09:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of leaders of UNSW student organisations[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NLIST, WP:NOTDATABASE, WP:GNG. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 08:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Lists of people, Education, and Lists. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 08:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Turtletennisfogwheat (talk) 09:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, BEFORE does not show any possibility of content being suitable for inclusion elsewhere. Triptothecottage (talk) 12:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NLIST. LibStar (talk) 16:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chandni Mistry[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE on this article about a local councillor; there is additional local coverage from the same newspapers already referenced, but no additional national coverage. She was a councillor for less than a year, was investigated for electoral fraud but no action was taken, and she was nominated for, but did not win, an award. She is a fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, but I don't believe that contributes to notability (see brief discussion from 2011 here). I do not think she meets WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:NPOL. Tacyarg (talk) 08:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Women, and United Kingdom. Tacyarg (talk) 08:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This wikipedia page has already been granted a B class Wikipedia status as defined The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. This therefore is relevant page and is particularly important given that this page represents the youngest BAME councillor in the history of the city. This seems like a malicious second attempt to request deletion of the wikipedia as the country falls into a general election. All aspects of the wikipedia page have been properly referenced as approved by various sources. With reference to Royal Society of Arts, the individual is listed on their pages. Handedits (talk) 11:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, regarding your use of the word "malicious" to describe my deletion proposal. I reject this. I have no conflict of interest regarding this councillor or the article about her. I'm not sure what you mean by second attempt, but if you mean the AFC decline in November, that was another person. I have not opened a previous deletion discussion about this article. Tacyarg (talk) 12:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very Important Party[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts, Events, Computing, and France. toweli (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Off Road with Gul Panag[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 14:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United States of America. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Satja Nai Chum Joan (Suea Sung Fah III)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 14:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Thailand. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Looking up สัจจะในชุมโจร turns up lots of coverage (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL), though as is usual for entertainment news, a lot of it is based on supplied PR material. --Paul_012 (talk) 05:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Star Hill Ponies[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:NTV and WP:GNG DonaldD23 talk to me 14:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Comics and animation, United Kingdom, and Wales. DonaldD23 talk to me 14:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I found a newspaper article called "Trotting towards stardom" in the South Wales Evening Post, April 1999, and one called "Titanic tricks for TV puppets" in the Western Daily Press, April 1999. Toughpigs (talk) 17:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sokpoly Voeun[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Semi-advertorialized article about a filmmaker and photographer, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for filmmakers or photographers. The strongest attempted notability claim here is a table of "nominations" for awards at various film festivals, except there aren't actually real awards in the mix here: three of the listed festivals are just "screened" or "selected", with no evidence of any actual award nominations or wins shown at all, and most of them are "to be announced" because the festival is still in the future and hasn't even released its program announcements yet, so it still isn't even confirmed that the film will even screen there at all, let alone win any awards.
All of them, further, are "sourced" to the self-published websites of the film festivals themselves, rather than media coverage, and the rest of the footnotes are also a mix of primary and unreliable sources that aren't support for notability, rather than WP:GNG-building coverage in media or books.
There's also a possible conflict of interest here, as the creator and primary other editor have been blocked as sockpuppets in an WP:SPI check following their behaviour in the related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reign in Slumber discussion. Bearcat (talk) 14:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Photography, and Cambodia. Bearcat (talk) 14:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:27, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Divide Pictures[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Exists but doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG / WP:ORG. Boleyn (talk) 12:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Companies, and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bago University Students' Union[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have performed WP:BEFORE and searched for in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources. However, I found only these:

These sources are just passing mentions. The subject fails to meet WP:GNG. The majority of sources that are cited are about the protest and arrest, where other people and this union's members were arrested. Does this establish notability? Please ping me if you find any in-depth coverage of the subject. GrabUp - Talk 10:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Education, and Myanmar. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

India-Latin America relations[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles on diplomatic relations are supposed to be country specific as long as they concern modern period. This article's title is too broad, inaccurate and whatever is added here can be already found on other articles.Ratnahastin (talk) 05:08, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't share that understanding of what counts as a legitimate article at all; there are many articles concerning country-to-region relations, such as Africa–India relations, Sino-Latin America relations, etc. Also, I would like to ask which other articles most of the information in this article can be found at. GreekApple123 (talk) 05:40, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Africa–India relations is based on historical relations while Sino-Latin America relations shall also require deletion.Ratnahastin (talk) 06:15, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Politics, Economics, India, and Latin America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or Merge the article is well formatted and cited with many references which covers this topic in depth. It does spun around the topic, passes general notability. However if merging is an option then I'd not oppose it merging in Foreign relations of India. Based Kashmiri (talk) 15:38, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The page is well written and has many reliable sources with significant coverage on the India-Latin economic and trade ties and history. Passes WP:GNG. I am also not opposed to Merge to Foreign relations of India. RangersRus (talk) 13:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. Duplicative of other articles. No point. Yilloslime (talk) 15:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom or Merge into other Indian articles about relations with Latin America

48JCL (talk) 13:26, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:04, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article is well sourced and covers India's relations with Latin America. With India's growing economy, this a topic which has been getting covered these past years. Dash9Z (talk) 07:48, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Synergy Teleconferencing System[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Obscure Bulletin board system, ~~which was/is based in the Bay Area from what I can tell~~. I couldn't find any SIGCOV. Redirecting to Diversi-Dial would be a reasonable outcome. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Internet, and California. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 04:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it might not be based in the Bay Area, I might have gotten this confused with "Synerchat" which appears to be related to Synergy Teleconferencing System but might not be the same thing. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:00, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... turns out Synergy Teleconferencing System was definitely a global thing. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 05:05, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bombing of Toncontín International Airport[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unneccessary WP:FORK of Football War, already covered there in a few sentences. Page unlikely to be expanded nor new RS published Mztourist (talk) 05:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

u can delete if u want Wikidude2243 (talk) 06:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

or i i can change text Wikidude2243 (talk) 06:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i can change the text Wikidude2243 (talk) 06:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, El Salvador, and Honduras. jlwoodwa (talk) 07:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris King and Vicki Grant[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article doesn't have reception or signification coverage about the character, and the hero forms section was written awfully or its fully redundant; thus failing WP:GNG. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 06:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. 🍕Boneless Pizza!🍕 (🔔) 06:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Formal Sigh[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I wasn't able to find anything other than mentions in reliable sources. For example, they're mentioned in this interview in The Quietus ("[...] says Gayna Rose Madder, one of the scene’s most forward-thinking artists with Shiny Two Shiny and A Formal Sigh") and in issue 313 of SLUG Magazine ("Both were in A Formal Sigh, which had the distinction of having done a legendary Peel Session before they split from that band"). Using Newspapers.com, I also found mere mentions from the period of the band's existence. The article was created by User:Markpeters, who has the same exact name as the bassist. toweli (talk) 06:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. toweli (talk) 06:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ann'so[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't pass WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. Claggy (talk) 05:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Claggy (talk) 05:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and France. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Bekemeier[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:NACTOR and WP:BIO. I can't find any WP:RS. Claggy (talk) 05:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Claggy (talk) 05:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to editing wikipedia. He is an actor/stuntman in SAG-AFTRA who has a world record and a couple of online fandoms. I am not sure what wp:rs, wp:nactor, wp:bio? If you can help me understand and fix this page rather than deleting it, I would greatly appreciate it.

I see what those things are now and he HAS had notable roles. He was the boogeyman in The Boogeyman and the main entity in the film Imaginary, among other films. Please look at his IMDB for background if you insist he has not been in enough. And his world record is clearly linked on this page. Or is that also not enough? He is well known for his contributions to the Atlanta stunt and contortion community. As far as reliable sources... is the Guinness site and IMDB not enough? Of course there are no peer-reviewed articles as he is a stuntman... I am happy to try to add more sources, but those are fairly reputable for this line of work.

I motion to move this to the improvements page instead of deletion. I am open to any suggestions for improvement.

Cheers,

cashworth6

Jiří Vondráček (footballer)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:GNG criteria. He played only one game in professional competition. FromCzech (talk) 05:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 05:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agree with nominator. When I created this in 2011 there was a good chance notability would trend upwards. Now it is clear there is insufficient notability for a Wikipedia article. C 679 06:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 08:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A good catch. A non-career within football, not enough significant coverage. Geschichte (talk) 14:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 16:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 16:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—per above. Anwegmann (talk) 17:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EasyMock[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Has one ref from a conference paper by author. Passing mentions in conference papers and low-quality publications. --WikiLinuz (talk) 05:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: created by a long-blocked editor with a history of mass-generation of insignificant stubs. Imaginatorium (talk) 08:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Turtletennisfogwheat (talk) 09:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amir Hossein Hashemi[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

doesn't meet WP:GNGACTOR, Non include WP:RSP Claggy (talk) 05:51, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Claggy (talk) 05:51, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete while at first glance it may appear he has a lot of coverage, after checking each citation, most were bio pages and not articles, there were 2 interviews, 5 or 6 dead links, or just passing mentions. Hkkingg (talk) 07:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DUnit[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zero-install[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article has been undeleted following soft deletion from the previous AfD. Despite that, I still think that this fails WP:NPRODUCT and WP:NSOFT, as searching for "zero install" (with quotes) on Google returned no reliable independent secondary sources. GTrang (talk) 04:00, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I have changed the article so it now describes a concept, not the particular bit of software, and therefore think that the WP:GNG is more applicable. Some of the old information (about some product) is kept as a section. I am not attached to this text, so if it helps to keep the article, the whole section "Zero Install" (note the uppercase letters) can go. A decent amount of OK sources can be found if the same search is performed on Google Scholar. The problem is that most of these sources do not provide much coverage. The only coherent source found by me that has WP:SIGCOV is a bachelor's thesis, and thus somewhat weak from the reputability perspective. --Викидим (talk) 04:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep since it is not a product, but a kind of process the essays are not relevant. I think more time is required to allow improvement. I remember this concept from over a decade ago, so it is not a new-fangled idea. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:46, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yet another option to consider is to merge the lead into Installation (computer programs)#Necessity (renaming the destination section accordingly). The destination section currently has no sources. --Викидим (talk) 05:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This article has become some kind of Frankenstein combination page that disambiguates between several usages of the term zero-install, even though the article was originally about a specific piece of software. I would rather have this article deleted and then a new article created about zero-install created, if the general concept is even notable in the first place. Notability doesn't stack -- using the term in two different contexts to establish notability is very confusing. HyperAccelerated (talk) 19:30, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The only sources related to a concept itself are a B. S. WP:SCHOLARSHIP thesis (it's not even masters!) only cited by a patent and the software and a WP:RESEARCHGATE paper that does not appear to be in any peer-reviewed journal or have significant citations. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:58, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cuppa (Java library)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CsUnit[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Has one ref from a predatory journal. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:00, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CppUnit[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Capybara (software)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poitín (band)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:BAND criteria. The founder and main contributor of the site is apparently someone from the band and the page is more a self-presentation. FromCzech (talk) 04:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 04:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughts. Do you have any suggestions to avoid it being deleted? Poitin31 (talk) 17:31, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious as well how to avoid deletion (I'm not a member of this band in case of any accusation of self-presentation). Kmarty (talk) 11:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cantata++[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BrowserStack[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and subject specific WP:CORP. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Internet, Software, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per Dreamweaver CC: The Missing Manual, Selenium Framework Design in Keyword-Driven Testing, Selenium Essentials, Vue on Rails, and Automated Software Testing with Cypress (an entire chapter from CRC Press. SL93 (talk) 22:54, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appium[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ABAP Unit[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HttpUnit[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay of Evelix[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unsourced except a dead link; cannot find any references to the family as a whole rather than individual members. Rusalkii (talk) 04:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Scotland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or Redirect: inadequate BEFORE - the usual sources for baronetcies (cf the many hundreds of other articles on baronetcies) are available if anyone takes the trouble to look. However, it's true that the article is in poor shape and inaccurate in part, by comparison with Cokayne (the standard and authoritative reference on baronetcies). The article can be corrected from that, but frankly, little would be lost if it were redirected to Lindsay baronets#Lindsay baronets, of Evelick (1666) (per WP:ATD - "Lindsay of Evelix" is a plausible search term), where the additional references would be more useful. Ingratis (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

XUnit[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:52, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HtmlUnit[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. All references are self-published. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:52, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Short History of the Sudan[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unsourced; I can't find a single source that doesn't refer to the much shorter work by Margaret Shinnie. Rusalkii (talk) 04:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, History, Sudan, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SOAtest[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. All references are self-published. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, Internet, and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HammerDB[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. All references are self-published. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:54, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nikto (vulnerability scanner)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Purely written for promotion. Article is closely related to another promotional BLP, Chris Sullo. (Note: The author (User:Root exploit) also self-describes themselves as "Security Researcher" on their userpage). --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about notability for software but some notability does appear to exist: https://www.cisa.gov/resources-tools/services/nikto https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/nikto (not a reliable source itself but shows the existence of other sources). Traumnovelle (talk) 04:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:54, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Sullo[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SNG. Purely written for promotion. Article's author also wrote Nikto (vulnerability scanner) - subject closely related to the article in nomination. (Note: The author (User:Root exploit) also self-describes themselves as "Security Researcher" on their userpage). --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing, Internet, United States of America, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:55, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Long[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:SNG. Subject is not notable and the article is purely written for promotion (it even reads like a personal resume). Also, most of the content is WP:SYNTH. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. --WikiLinuz (talk) 04:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Computing, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Fox (author)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to be overly promotional and shows no sign of meeting WP:GNG due to lack of RS. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 03:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Entertainment, Finance, Law, Internet, California, Michigan, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SagamoreHill Broadcasting[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the WP:NCORP because of a lack of in-depth coverage. PROD was contested so bringing it to AfD. Let'srun (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Companies, and Georgia (U.S. state). Let'srun (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: While I am unable to find indepth articles specifically about SagamoreHill Broadcasting, I did see plenty of articles that mention the company and articles about the stations it owns. Hkkingg (talk) 07:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Agcaoili[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Almost entirely the work of User:Greyhat, who, based on the deleted edit summaries for File:Phil Agcaoili 2011.jpg, has been in personal contact with the subject. Unclear the subject is notable, and the article is highly promotional. The company he founded is apparently not notable enough to have an article. -- Beland (talk) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Internet, Georgia (U.S. state), New York, and Virginia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nima Hashemi[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet WP:DIRECTOR and WP:GNG. I don't see any RS. Claggy (talk) 02:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Claggy (talk) 02:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify for now: I would have thought he might be notable as stage director but fair enough. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zesławicki Lagoon[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A small artificial reservoir in suburban Krakow; fails WP:GNG. Both sources in the article are WP:USERGENERATED; a BEFORE search does not unearth any additional qualifying sources. Under WP:NGEO, an artificial infrastructure entity qualifies for notability under GNG and otherwise redirects to the notable feature that prompted its creation. In this case, the river the the lagoon impounds is not notable and thus, without qualifying sources, neither its the lagoon itself. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Poland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't translated these but a search for "Zalew Zesławicki" brings up [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]. I'm not sure if all of these pass GNG, for instance the last one is just a single sentence, but there's at least sources. SportingFlyer T·C 06:38, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Its likely notable as a geographic feature. There will be the countries water body reference i.e. a Bathymetrical register that describes width/height/depth and 100 other properties. scope_creep^Talk 08:48, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not listed in the official Polish directory of bodies of water: WYKAZ NAZW WÓD STOJĄCYCH (LIST OF NAMES OF STANDING WATERS). Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:51, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think the area surrounding the lagoon is a park, recognized for the bird-watching that can be done there. (See the references.) The parking available there sounds like further evidence of the local council regarding the location as important for recreation (including bird-watching), although perhaps the parking is also used by water department staff. Together with everything else, this adds up to notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thumb Cellular[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails GNG and NCORP. Sources in article and found in BEFORE do not meet WP:SIRS, addressing the subject directly and indepth by independent reliable sources. Found name mentions, promotional, listings, nothing meeting WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 01:14, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:15, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why not try to add on to the article rather than delete it? I worked on it for literally 2 1/2 hours trying to find the most information I could on the subject. I did it right before I had to go to work too. Plus, there are many local cellular providers and local radio stations listed on Wikipedia that have been up for years, meaning that there is an interest in them. What makes Thumb Cellular different? Demondude182 (talk) 07:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the current rule is supposed to be that we can't trust what companies have to say about themselves. This includes pres releases, and most of the regular business announcements that you see, which are mostly just copy-and-pasted press releases. It used to be less strict, and the articles on those other local cellular providers were probably created back then, and nobody has gotten around to reviewing if they need to be deleted since then. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I see some WP:ROUTINE local coverage but nothing that meets WP:ORGCRIT. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm relisting because there is an unbolded Keep here from the article creator, preventing a Soft Deletion closure.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please offer an assessment of improvements to the article since its nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mountain House Community station[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This proposed commuter train station does not pass WP:GNG or WP:NSTATION Sources 1, 4, and 5 have WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS of this planned station in the broader context of the Valley Link system; sources 2 and 3 are primary sources. With this station not scheduled to open until 2028 at the earliest, a standalone article is WP:TOOSOON. I propose to redirect this page to Valley Link until there is sufficient SIGCOV in reliable sources to warrant a standalone page. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Stations, and California. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nomination. Appears to be too soon for a standalone article. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 12:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are already lots of references, and their number and length will grow as designs are finalized and coverage of the project and individual stations continues. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You obviously didn't read them as none of the independent sources say more than a sentence or two about the station, and you're making a very bold assumption about a station not expected to open until near the end of the decade. Valley Link already exists. But why let facts get in the way of your personal feelings? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 12:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Per WP:FUTURE "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." According to the sources, "The Valley Link project has been awarded $25 million by the state.That funding will go toward Valley Link’s first phase — the 26-mile section from the Pleasanton BART station to the proposed Mountain House station. The overall project is expected to cost $3.6 billion." — Maile (talk) 19:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of how certain the WP:FUTURE is, the station still has to pass the WP:SIGCOV test to be notable, and it doesn't -- it has passing references in sources focused on the whole system. It will someday, but until then, a redirect is appropriate. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. Fails NOT and GNG. The above keeps have entirely missed the part of FUTURE that says future events should be included only if the event is notable (bolding mine); there is no IRS SIGCOV of this event, so it emphatically fails that requirement. JoelleJay (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tan Yinglan[edit]

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Factors do not appear to have meaningfully changed since the prior discussion. He's an active businessperson, and Insignia Ventures Partners may be notable but he does not appear so as an author. Star Mississippi 01:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, and Singapore. Star Mississippi 01:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Apache–MySQL–PHP packages[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There was an AfD on this previously that determined to keep this article on the basis that AfD is not a place to resolve sourcing concerns. I think there are sourcing concerns with respect to notablity, which is a valid reason to bring an AfD. I can't find any reliable article that actually makes comparisons between different AMP stacks. The two sources in the article are about individual stacks, and don't make any comparisons between different stacks. HyperAccelerated (talk) 23:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Owen× ☎ 23:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet, Software, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:08, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to LAMP (software bundle) and redirect those that relate to AMP variants to LAMP (software bundle)#Variants. As HA has said, this article does not make any meaningful comparisons, so I don't see any objections against its inclusion in Wikipedia somewhere. I'm also pretty sure that we can find reliable sources that tell us these softwares are *AMP stacks for that platform.
After merging, redirects without mention can go through G8 or RfD later. Aaron Liu (talk) 01:18, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now. This is a list article, it doesn't need sourcing for each individual linked page. However, many of the linked articles have their own problems; in particular, WIMP (software bundle), AMPPS, Zend Server, and WampServer might not survive AFD. It seems plausible that either those pages might be merged here, or that, after some of them would be removed, there would not be enough content for an article separate from LAMP (software bundle). Until that is resolved, I think this should be kept. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how this is long enough for its own article nor how there are enough mentions as a whole to meet WP:NLIST. Aaron Liu (talk) 01:38, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Aaron's comment above. I don't see how anything you brought up here pertains to WP: NLIST. HyperAccelerated (talk) 03:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If there are ten stand-alone articles on "LAMP variants that aren't on Linux", it seems reasonable that there would be a list of them somewhere (possibly at LAMP (software bundle) or BAPP rather than a stand-alone article, but somewhere). On the other hand, if six of those stand-alone articles are merged or deleted, the value of a list article is clearly decreased. Walsh90210 (talk) 04:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The number of stand-alone articles in a list and its notability have absolutely nothing to do with one another. Please read WP: NLIST. HyperAccelerated (talk) 13:41, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability. - a longer list is more likely to fulfill a useful navigation purpose. Walsh90210 (talk) 21:18, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have shown nothing to indicate that this list fulfills any of those purposes. HyperAccelerated (talk) 21:29, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really don’t see how a list of every combination is useful. Comparing the individual components makes much more sense. At most, this can be part of another article. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Can the nominator provide a link to th previous AFD on this article subject? That is typically included in a nomination statement or in a box by the nomination. Thanks.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The previous AfD can be found on the article's talk page, or by clicking here. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Astorga Junquera[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject has a stable article at Spanish Wikipedia but notability according to English Wikipedia guidelines for either WP:GNG, WP:NACADEMIC or WP:ARTIST isn't evident. I'd like to hear what others think. Rkieferbaum (talk) 01:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Artists, and Venezuela. Rkieferbaum (talk) 01:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ecuador-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notable Any biography: The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field- His recognized contribution to Digital Art Curation. HarveyPrototype (talk) 20:52, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recognized by whom? The term "digital art curation" does not even appear in the article. Geschichte (talk) 04:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WBON-LD[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Kentucky. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jesse Campbell (equestrian)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:PSEUDO; most notably only peripherally mentioned in relation to the passing of his wife. Basically a WP:BLP1E if that can be considered an E at all. Firestar464 (talk) 00:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Horse racing. Firestar464 (talk) 00:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Coverage is all about his spouse dying; this is the only coverage of this person [26] to at least mention him in the title, but it's a non-RS, so not helping notability here. Oaktree b (talk) 01:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep The nominator deserves to be trouted. How about doing a BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion? There is tons of in-depths coverage out there from long before his wife died, for example Eventing Nation in September 2018, Radio New Zealand in June 2021 Gazette & Herald in July 2021. Schwede 66 02:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Olympics and New Zealand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ridiculous nomination (probably not helped by the poorly written article). Even without a WP:BEFORE, one would expect fifth in the NZ team at the Olympics to undoubtedly result in multiple examples of non-trivial coverage. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 04:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The sources found by Schwede66 contains enough WP:SIGCOV with which to meet the WP:GNG. There appears to be more to this subject than WP:1E as well. Let'srun (talk) 14:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep The article was created three years ago and his wife did not have her own page this month prior to the racing accident that led to her unfortunate death, so to cite WP:1E of her death does not make logical sense. Happy to start a rewrite and to include additional sources. Hildreth Gazzard (talk) 16:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saturne Party[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Demoscene#List of demoparties. toweli (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Visual arts, Events, Computing, and France. toweli (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cold Driven[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a band, not reliably sourced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NMUSIC. The attempted notability claim, that they had a single peak #51 in the charts, is unsourced and has proven entirely unverifiable, and #51 is in no way a high enough chart position to constitute and instant notability freebie without adequate sourcing -- but the only source cited here at all is a (pporly written) directory entry, and on a WP:BEFORE search for other sources all I'm finding is their own hometown local paper and an alt-weekly, which isn't enough to get them over WP:GNG if it's all they've got. Bearcat (talk) 00:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 00:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files[edit]

Categories[edit]

NEW NOMINATIONS[edit]

Category:Holden former executives[edit]

Propose merging Category:Holden former executives to Category:Holden executives
Propose merging Category:General Motors former executives to Category:General Motors executives

Nominator's rationale: No need to distinguish between former and (implicitly) current GM executives Mason (talk) 22:10, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scottish models by century[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Scottish models by century (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose merging Category:21st-century Scottish models to Category:21st-century Scottish people
Propose deleting Category:Welsh models by century (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:English models by century (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose merging Category:21st-century English models to Category:21st-century English people
Propose merging Category:20th-century models from Northern Ireland to Category:20th-century people from Northern Ireland
Propose merging Category:20th-century Australian models to Category:20th-century Australian people
Propose deleting Category:Models from Northern Ireland by century (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose merging Category:20th-century Irish models to Category:20th-century Irish people
Propose merging Category:20th-century American models to Category:20th-century American people
Propose merging Category:21st-century Australian models to Category:21st-century Australian people
Propose deleting Category:Irish models by century (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:British models by century (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Australian models by century (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:American models by century (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose merging Category:20th-century Canadian models to Category:20th-century Canadian people
Propose deleting Category:Canadian models by century (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose merging Category:21st-century Canadian models to Category:21st-century Canadian people
Propose merging Category:21st-century models from Northern Ireland to Category:21st-century people from Northern Ireland
Propose merging Category:21st-century Irish models to Category:21st-century Irish people
Propose merging Category:21st-century American models to Category:21st-century American people
Propose deleting Category:Models by century and nationality (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:21st-century models (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Models by nationality and century (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:Models by century (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:20th-century models (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:20th-century models by nationality (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose deleting Category:21st-century models by nationality (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose merging Category:21st-century British models to Category:British models and Category:21st-century British people
Propose merging Category:20th-century Scottish models to Category:20th-century Scottish people and Category:Scottish models
Propose merging Category:20th-century English models to Category:English models and Category:20th-century English people
Propose merging Category:21st-century Welsh models to Category:Welsh models and Category:21st-century Welsh people
Propose merging Category:20th-century British models to Category:20th-century British people and Category:British models
Propose merging Category:20th-century Welsh models to Category:Welsh models and Category:20th-century Welsh people

Nominator's rationale: Models, like other modern occupations, aren't diffused by century.Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_March_7#Models_by_century. I urge the category creator to look at the deletion history/logs of a category before they create it. Mason (talk) 21:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Body horror video games[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Body horror video games (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Seems to be entirely original research, not a thing whatsoever in video games, or in horror video games. User has been warned repeated for adding, and now creating, incorrect categories. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 20:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Governing body of political parties[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Governing body of political parties (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Redundant, incorrect on many counts. Nohe of the articles in the category is specifically about any "governing body". - Altenmann >talk 20:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Farmers practicing sustainable agriculture[edit]

Propose merging Category:Farmers practicing sustainable agriculture to Category:Farmers

Nominator's rationale: Non-defining intersection with occupation. Mason (talk) 20:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jews and Judaism in Sullivan County, New York[edit]

Propose merging Category:Jews and Judaism in Sullivan County, New York to Category:Religious buildings and structures in Sullivan County, New York

Nominator's rationale: Merge; category had a few summer camps, some not Jewish-specific, which have been moved to the appropriate categories. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:01, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ezo'la[edit]

Propose renaming Category:Ezo'la to Category:Ezóla

Nominator's rationale: Category is tagged with {{Correct title}} but there does not appear to exist any technical reason for it being at the current location. I still didn't go for WP:C2D to be safe. Nickps (talk) 17:14, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Nickps (talk) 17:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wuhan University Faculty of Humanities[edit]

Propose merging Category:Wuhan University Faculty of Humanities to Category:Academic staff of Wuhan University
Propose deleting Category:Wuhan University Faculty of Medical Sciences to Category:Wuhan University
Propose merging Category:Wuhan University Faculty of Social Sciences to Category:Wuhan University

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge because these single item categories doesn't help with navigation within this university. Further they don't even have eponymous pages. Mason (talk) 13:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, and Category:Wuhan University School of Medicine alumni should be nominated for merging too. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:48, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Institute of Ukrainian Archaeography[edit]

Propose merging Category:Institute of Ukrainian Archaeography to Category:Institute of Ukrainian Archaeography and Source Studies

Nominator's rationale: I think that these are the same organization Mason (talk) 13:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ongoing conflicts in the Middle East[edit]

Propose renaming Category:Ongoing conflicts in the Middle East to Category:Conflicts in the Middle East

Nominator's rationale: rename, there is no reason to limit this to ongoing conflicts, we do not have any other Ongoing conflicts category. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 18:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Institutes of Nirma University of Science & Technology[edit]

Propose renaming Category:Institutes of Nirma University of Science & Technology to Category:Nirma University

Nominator's rationale: I think we should rename this category to include the university. Main article is a redirect to Nirma University via Nirma University of Science & Technology Mason (talk) 13:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battles by location in Italy[edit]

Propose merging Category:Battles by location in Italy to Category:Military history of Italy by region
Propose upmerging for now Category:Battles in Abruzzo‎ (2 P) to Category:History of Abruzzo
Propose renaming Category:Battles in Apulia‎ (13 P) to Category:Military history of Apulia‎
Propose upmerging for now Category:Battles in Basilicata‎ (3 P) to Category:History of Basilicata
Propose renaming Category:Battles in Calabria‎ (9 P) to Category:Military history of Calabria‎
Propose upmerging Category:Battles in Campania‎ (29 P) to Category:Military history of Campania
Propose upmerging Category:Battles in Emilia-Romagna‎ (1 C, 51 P) to Category:Military history of Emilia-Romagna
Propose renaming Category:Battles in Friuli-Venezia Giulia‎ (1 C, 8 P) to Category:Military history of Friuli-Venezia Giulia
Propose renaming Category:Battles in Lazio‎ (1 C, 18 P) to Category:Military history of Lazio
Propose renaming Category:Battles in Liguria‎ (1 C, 12 P) to Category:Military history of Liguria‎
Propose renaming Category:Battles in Lombardy‎ (48 P) to Category:Military history of Lombardy
Propose renaming Category:Battles in Marche‎ (10 P) to Category:Military history of Marche
Propose upmerging for now Category:Battles in Molise‎ (2 P) to Category:History of Molise
Propose upmerging Category:Battles in Piedmont‎ (32 P) to Category:Military history of Piedmont
Propose upmerging Category:Battles in Sardinia‎ (5 P) to Category:Military history of Sardinia
Propose upmerging Category:Battles in Sicily‎ (1 C, 23 P) to Category:Military history of Sicily
Propose upmerging for now Category:Battles in Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol‎ (2 P) to Category:History of Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol
Propose upmerging Category:Battles in Tuscany‎ (19 P) to Category:Military history of Tuscany
Propose upmerging for now Category:Battles in Umbria‎ (3 P) to Category:History of Umbria
Propose upmerging Category:Battles in Veneto‎ (33 P) to Category:Military history of Veneto‎

Nominator's rationale: WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN. Follow-up to recent precedents, e.g. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 24#Battles by location in Germany. Upmerging those that already have dedicated Military history of Fooland cats, Renaming those that have at least 5 P to Military history of Fooland, Upmerging those that have fewer than 5 P to History of Fooland for now. NLeeuw (talk) 09:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename/merge per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Central Greece[edit]

Propose splitting Category:Central Greece to Category:Central Greece (region) and Category:Central Greece (geographic region)

Proposed contents of Category:Central Greece (region) – modern times (after 1987)

Proposed contents of Category:Central Greece (geographic region) – history (before 1987)
- Main article: Central Greece (geographic region)
- Other articles: Attica, Phocis and Locris Prefecture.
- Child categories: Category:History of Central Greece, Category:Archaeological discoveries in Central Greece.

Propose purging Attica (region).

Nominator's rationale: WP:SHAREDNAME. Central Greece (region) is the modern administrative region (Περιφέρεια perifereia) established in 1987. Central Greece (geographic region) is the historic geographical region (γεωγραφικό διαμέρισμα geografiko diamerisma) abolished in 1987. I have WP:BOLDly renamed Central Greece (an WP:UNSOURCED article) to Central Greece (geographic region), and turned Central Greece into a DP, hoping to clarify the situation. Splitting the category is the next logical step. Child categories can be renamed if so desired per WP:C2C once this split is approved. NLeeuw (talk) 08:08, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like a too complex solution for a not so complex problem. I think we should just remove Attica from Category:History of Central Greece and every of its subcategories. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is too simplistic a solution for a complex problem.

I'll illustrate the problem with maps:

Central Greece (region), after 1987
Central Greece (geographic region), before 1987
Geographic regions of Greece, before 1987

If we want this category to be only about the modern administrative region (perifereia) of Central Greece, it's not just about removing Attica, it is also removing parts of Western Greece, removing the northeast coast of the Pelopponese (or not?), removing Kythira (or not?), but adding Skyros (or not?), and so on. NLeeuw (talk) 10:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough to remove those too. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

People with acquired citizenship or Naturalized citizens[edit]

Propose merging Category:People with acquired American citizenship to Category:Naturalized citizens of the United States
Propose merging Category:People with acquired British citizenship to Category:Naturalised citizens of the United Kingdom
Propose merging Category:People with acquired French citizenship to Category:Naturalized citizens of France
Propose merging Category:People with acquired Indian citizenship to Category:Naturalised citizens of India
Propose merging Category:People with acquired Israeli citizenship to Category:Naturalized citizens of Israel
Propose merging Category:People with acquired Russian citizenship to Category:Naturalised citizens of Russia

Nominator's rationale: Merge; I don't see any difference between "Acquired citizenship" and "Naturalized citizen". Since I can't be sure, I will start this as a small Cfd before deciding on continuing with the rest. Also leave redirect. Omnis Scientia (talk) 07:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: "Naturalized citizens" categories are MUCH older than "Acquired citizenship" ones. Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am inclined to support this, as I can't tell the difference either, but I am open to counter arguments. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Battles of the Middle Ages by location[edit]

Category:Battles of the Middle Ages by location (2 C, 0 P)
Category:Battles in medieval Anatolia‎ (35 P)
Category:Battles in medieval Thrace‎ (5 P)
Option 1: Just delete all. All battles are already in the relevant involving former country X categories. (most of these are Byzantine Empire and its successors, Arab caliphates, Bulgaria, Armenia, Seljuk sultanates and their successors). Neither Thrace nor Anatolia was or is a "country".
Option 2: Upmerge to Category:Battles of the Middle Ages; delete Category:Battles of the Middle Ages by location. This seeks a common denominator to upmerge to, as the precedent does. But to me, it rather feels like "dumping" them into a rather unspecific category that isn't very helpful.
Option 3: Rename to Category:Military history of medieval Anatolia and Category:Military history of medieval Thrace; add parent Category:Military history of Turkey; delete Category:Battles of the Middle Ages by location. This is somewhat in line with other recent precedents that upmerge or rename Battles in Fooland to Military history of (modern administrative unit). But due to the Lorraine problem, these would not be proper new categories. "Turkey" is a proper modern administrative unit, but "medieval Thrace" and "medieval Anatolia" aren't; neither Thrace nor Anatolia was or is a "country", nor is there any Category:Military history of medieval Fooland.
Option 4: Merge directly into Category:Military history of Turkey; delete Category:Battles of the Middle Ages by location. This is more closely in line with other recent precedents that upmerge or rename Battles in Fooland to Military history of (modern administrative unit). However, this is quite a stretch, as the Republic of Turkey was not established until 1923, and the ancestors of modern Turks did not really enter Anatolia until the 11th century as Seljuks. Unlike other children of Category:Middle Ages by country, there isn't a Category:Medieval Turkey, nor is there any Category:Military history of medieval Fooland.

Nominator's rationale: WP:MILMOS#BATTLESIN. This is a follow-up to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 May 24#Category:Battles of the Byzantine–Bulgarian Wars in Thrace. All three were upmerged to Category:Battles of the Byzantine–Bulgarian Wars without a location marker. Given all considerations, I would recommend Option 1, but I'm curious to hear what others have to say. NLeeuw (talk) 06:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping @Marcocapelle for follow-up. NLeeuw (talk) 06:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prefer 1 too. Option 2 (having articles directly in a medieval category) would conflict with Category:Conflicts by time which mostly contains battles and option 3 and 4 are far from ideal as already pointed out by nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taoists from Imperial China‎[edit]

Propose merging Category:Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China and Category:10th-century Taoists
Propose merging Category:Jin (Later Tang precursor) Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China and Category:10th-century Taoists
Propose merging Category:Min Kingdom Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China and Category:10th-century Taoists
Propose merging Category:Southern Tang Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China and Category:10th-century Taoists
Propose merging Category:Han dynasty Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China
Propose merging Category:Jin dynasty (266–420) Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China
Propose merging Category:Jin dynasty (1115–1234) Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China
Propose merging Category:Ming dynasty Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China
Propose merging Category:Northern and Southern dynasties Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China
Propose merging Category:Northern Wei Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China
Propose merging Category:Northern Zhou Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China and Category:6th-century Taoists
Propose merging Category:Qing dynasty Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China
Propose merging Category:Sixteen Kingdoms Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China
Propose merging Category:Cheng Han Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China and Category:4th-century Taoists
Propose merging Category:Song dynasty Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China
Propose merging Category:Sui dynasty Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China
Propose merging Category:Tang dynasty Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China
Propose merging Category:Three Kingdoms Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China and Category:3rd-century Taoists
Propose merging Category:Cao Wei Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China and Category:3rd-century Taoists
Propose merging Category:Eastern Wu Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China and Category:3rd-century Taoists
Propose merging Category:Yuan dynasty Taoists to Category:Taoists from Imperial China

Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:OCEGRS, trivial intersection with religion. This is follow-up on this earlier discussion.

@Smasongarrison, Omnis Scientia, Nederlandse Leeuw, and Yinweiaiqing: pinging contributors to previous discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge mer nom. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question Okay, I am in favour of upmerging for now all those categories that have fewer than 5 items (I had recommended such a follow-up, so thanks for that!). But you would even upmerge a relatively well-populated category like Category:Tang dynasty Taoists (26 P), as the specific dynasty is considered "trivial" in addition to each of these people being Taoists from Imperial China? Just making sure that we're all on the same page. NLeeuw (talk) 06:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We might make an exception for the Song and Tang dynasty, since Taoism appears to be most widely accepted under these two dynasties. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:42, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note to @Mason: In your last comment, you said to Yinweiaiqing you have made A LOT of categories that are still underpopulated. That's probably not true. As far as I know, all the underpopulated categories that I listed for possible future upmerging were created by other people over the course of many years, some going back to 2010. These were not created by Yinweiaiqing a few days ago just to populate the Category:People from Imperial China by religion. I didn't check all edit histories, but all categories I checked weren't newly created by Yinweiaiqing a few days ago. NLeeuw (talk) 06:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge for now for the tiny categories. Re; Good to know about Yinweiaiqing . I still stand by my repeated request that they populate their categories. But I do recognize that since I've raised the issue they haven't been making single person cateogories. Mason (talk) 11:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Syndromes with autism[edit]

Propose renaming Category:Syndromes with autism to Category:Syndromic autism

Nominator's rationale: "Syndromic autism" is much more commonly used than "Syndromes with autism". For example, on Google Scholar, "Syndromes with autism" OR "Syndrome with autism" yields about 516 results[27], whereas "Syndromic autism" gives about 3,470 results[28]. Additionally, renaming this category would also make it correspond to Syndromic autism article. Digressivo (talk) 05:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename per nom. Add Syndromic autism as Main article. NLeeuw (talk) 06:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not a defining characteristic of these syndromes. Marcocapelle (talk) 10:20, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Career achievements of snooker players[edit]

Propose merging Category:Career achievements of snooker players to Category:Career achievements of sportspeople

Nominator's rationale: Upmerge per WP:NARROWCAT Let'srun (talk) 03:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cartoon Network stubs[edit]

Propose deleting Category:Cartoon Network stubs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Stub category no longer populated enough to warrant retention. As always, stub categories need to have a minimum of 60 articles, but after I detagged a handful of articles that were too long to be tagged as stubs at all this went from 25 to 20. It has existed in its current form since 2011, after being deleted as underpopulated in 2007 -- but was then tagged as underpopulated again in 2018, until that template was deleted at TFD, so it's not entirely clear that it was ever really adequately populated at all.
Even the 20 pages that are here are a bit of a random grab bag, as it's populated mainly by video game or album tie-ins to Cartoon Network programming and/or foreign channels that franchised Cartoon Network or Boomerang branding, rather than things that actually have much to do with the Category:United States television stubs parent -- so it's not at all clear that there are actually very many things that could be added here to get it back over 60 articles again. It's not generally standard practice, at any rate, to stub-tag things for overly specific associations like particular TV networks; WikiProject Cartoon Network already has project templates on the talk pages anyway, so this isn't serving any important purpose that isn't already being served elsewhere. Bearcat (talk) 01:21, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or possibly merge, to Category:Animation stubs if the latter. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:19, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 20:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same question: delete or merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 02:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bearcat: what is your opinion on merging? Marcocapelle (talk) 03:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm of two minds. The international Cartoon Network or Boomerang franchise channels would be fine in Category:Animation stubs, but the tie-in albums probably don't belong there at all, the couple of actual TV shows in this category are already in Category:Animated television series stubs alongside this as it is and thus don't need to be double-filed in the general animation parent, and there's also a person in this grab-bag who wouldn't belong there. So merging would be fine, as long as there's a purge along with it. Bearcat (talk) 12:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:52, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Omaha people[edit]

Rename Category:Omaha (Native American) people to Category:Omaha Tribe of Nebraska people

Nominator's rationale As there is only one recognized Omaha tribe, the Omaha Tribe of Nebraska (that is the official tribal name on the federal register), change this category's name to match the official name and get rid of the clunky parentheses. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 05:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No oppose, but wouldn't Category:Omaha people be simpler? Marcocapelle (talk) 17:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle if I recall correctly that's what it was originally and then somebody changed it because they thought people would confuse it for people from the city of Omaha. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 02:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I see. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:27, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps Category:Omaha Tribe people would work. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 02:55, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Category:Omaha people to match Omaha people, and because similarly ambiguous names like Category:Iowa people/Category:People from Iowa aren't disambiguated in this manner. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LaundryPizza03 That is what it was before. Here is a link to the previous discussion. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 06:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Iowa should be renamed as well. That just results in maintenance headaches -- 65.92.244.143 (talk) 22:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 23:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support renaming to Category:Omaha Tribe people or Category:Omaha Tribe of Nebraska people. Noting that the parent cat is: Category:Omaha Tribe of Nebraska. We have ambiguity due to the tribe name and the city name. And since the city is at Omaha due to WP:COMMONNAME, we should find a way to provide clarity. I think using the name that the tribe themselves use is an easy way forward. - jc37 19:58, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Rename target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, House Blaster (talk · he/him) 02:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Recommend renaming main article Omaha people to Omaha Tribe of Nebraska, to avoid future confusion. Category:Omaha people is not in use because of its ambiguous name, so the main article runs the same risk. (It would have been convenient to rename the main article first and then speedy the category per WP:C2D, but oh well, here we are ). NLeeuw (talk) 07:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Hospitals in Dharwad[edit]

Propose renaming Category:Hospitals in Dharwad to Category:Hospitals in Hubli-Dharwad
Propose renaming Category:Hindu temples in Dharwad to Category:Hindu temples in Hubli-Dharwad
Propose merging Category:Buildings and structures in Dharwad to Category:Buildings and structures in Hubli-Dharwad
Propose renaming Category:Engineering colleges in Dharwad to Category:Engineering colleges in Hubli-Dharwad
Propose renaming Category:Medical colleges in Dharwad to Category:Medical colleges in Hubli-Dharwad
Propose merging Category:Universities and colleges in Dharwad to Category:Universities and colleges in Hubli-Dharwad
Propose merging Category:Education in Dharwad to Category:Education in Hubli-Dharwad
Propose renaming Category:Neighbourhoods in Dharwad to Category:Neighbourhoods in Hubli–Dharwad
Propose merging Category:Dharwad to Category:Hubli–Dharwad
Propose merging Category:Government of Dharwad to Category:Local government in Karnataka
Propose deleting Category:Geography of Dharwad (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Propose merging Category:Roads in Dharwad to Category:Roads in Dharwad district
Propose renaming Category:Road transport in Dharwad to Category:Road transport in Hubli-Dharwad
Propose renaming Category:Rail transport in Dharwad to Category:Rail transport in Hubli-Dharwad
Propose merging Category:Transport in Dharwad to Category:Transport in Hubli-Dharwad

Nominator's rationale: These categories are one half of a twin city Hubli-Dharwad. The cities have a single municipal corporation called Hubli-Dharwad Municipal Corporation. (It's like the Twin-Cities Minnesota). Almost all of these categories were made by now blocked sock puppet. Mason (talk) 01:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Engineering colleges in Prakasham District[edit]

Propose merging Category:Engineering colleges in Prakasham District to Category:Engineering colleges in Andhra Pradesh

Nominator's rationale: A category for Prakasham District doesn't exist. Upmerge Mason (talk) 01:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dual merge, also to Category:Universities and colleges in Prakasam district. A single-article category is not helpful for navigation. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:46, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Pop-band-stub[edit]

Propose deleting Template:Pop-band-stub (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Nominator's rationale: Stub template of unclear utility. It's only used on a grand total of ten articles, so it doesn't have its own dedicated stub category and instead just sorts those articles into the generic Category:Musical group stubs -- but because every last one of those ten articles features this template alongside a "Nationality-band-stub" template that sorts its articles into a more specific national or continental subcategory of Category:Musical group stubs, that means this template is adding nothing but unnecessary parent-and-child duplicate categorization. Bearcat (talk) 00:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Marcocapelle (talk) 03:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects[edit]

Wikipedia:Disney Jr.[edit]

Wikipedia:Disney Jr. → Disney Jr. (American TV channel) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Cross-namespace, Wikipedia project namespace redirect going to mainspace. Not needed, and apparent error. Not likely used by readers. Dank Jae 22:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh should Wikipedia talk:Disney Jr. also be included? Dank Jae 22:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse all moves, return article to Disney Junior, keep Disney Jr. as a redirect No discussion, no sources added on the new branding (as seen here in my edit comparison of the most current edit and my last edit last night reverting the logo change before all this happened), and most importantly, it's still sounded out as 'Junior' in the end and we're adding pointless parenthetical disambiguators for the purposes of Disney's branding guidelines, which isn't a thing we need to obey at all; this new name is a quick mention in the article (when proper and neutral sourcing is added) and a redirect at most. I loathe when clear warnings for sources which I asked for are ignored for pointless pagemoves like this so that a small group of editors try to curry non-existent favor with some branding manager at Disney who doesn't care at all. Nate • (chatter) 22:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:ALEXA[edit]

Wikipedia:ALEXA → Wikipedia:Search engine test#Alexa ratings (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Just discovered Wikipedia:Amazon Alexa. Retarget this redirect there? Steel1943 (talk) 20:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Wikipedia:Amazon Alexa, as the former Alexa product has been fully depreciated, though mention of the WP's former role should be made and hatnoted to Alexa Internet for clarification purposes. Nate • (chatter) 22:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Hardwick[edit]

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy withdrawn by nominator

The Mii Channel Theme[edit]

The Mii Channel Theme → Wii Menu#Mii Channel (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

A redirect to info about the Mii Channel that doesn't have anything about music, so the redirect is useless. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 17:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Propaganda bullhorn[edit]

Propaganda bullhorn → RT (TV network) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

PoV redirect (no matter how true it might be). Not a defining description of target article — Czello ^(music) 09:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~, but not for the first issue raised by nom-- PoV redirects are okay as per WP:RNEUTRAL, because redirects are usually hidden from view. If someone holding a certain PoV were to use a term, and someone else wanted more information on what that term meant, we shouldn't face them with the search screen just because the term they want info on is PoV. No, the reason this redirect should be deleted is because it is vague as all hell-- I sincerely doubt RT is the only thing that could ever be described as a "propaganda bullhorn". There is the argument that it should be retargeted to somewhere else instead of deleted-- perhaps to an article that discusses the generalities of news sources as propaganda machines. If someone can find a good alternate target, I'll adjust my vote accordingly. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Refine. to RT (TV network)#Responses. Lunamann is right that when they point out that being POV is not relevant, however they are wrong with the assumptions. While other things have been described as a "Propaganda bullhorn" the only thing to have been notably described as such is RT, I have to exclude "Russia" from Google searches to find other uses and every single use on Wikipedia is related to RT. So while this is in theory vague, in practice there is a very clear primary topic. There isn't, unfortunately, a single perfect target among the various mentions on en.wp. I think the one I've picked is best but I'm happy to hear arguments for alternatives. Thryduulf (talk) 11:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changing vote to Refine as per Thryduulf. That is a very good point, thank you for bringing that up-- I didn't know about John Kerry pinning this label on RT specifically, something mentioned in the proposed refine target. (Maybe I should've done my due diligence and searched the target article for mentions of this term? xP) Perhaps a hatnote at the top of the section ("Propaganda bullhorn redirects here, see also something something") would be a good idea, just to catch any that aren't looking for RT? I still remain unsure where to pipe said hatnote, though... 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

British intelligence services[edit]

British intelligence services → MI6 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Suggest a redirect to British intelligence agencies: the plural is unlikely to be used when a specific agency (MI6) is intended. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 08:39, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget as per nom. The argument given makes perfect sense to me; MI6 stands for Military Intelligence, Section 6, while its alternate name, SIS, stands for Secret Intelligence Service, neither of which are plural. The proposed target is similarly sensible; I don't see enough of a difference between the term "service" and the term "agency" to argue that this redirect shouldn't go here. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:29, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per nom, this is referring to MI5, MI6, etc. generically or collectively not to any single agency specifically. Thryduulf (talk) 11:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per nom, seems like common sense. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 16:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of canon law legal abbreviations[edit]

List of canon law legal abbreviations → List of Catholic canon law legal abbreviations (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Misleading redirect: the target is only about Catholic canon law, and not about canon law in general.

Thus, I believe this redirect should be deleted. Veverve (talk) 08:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers (Mellowhype Album) "Numbers" (Mellowhype)[edit]

Numbers (Mellowhype Album) "Numbers" (Mellowhype) → Numbers (MellowHype album) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This malformed title was only used for six minutes in 2012. I almost tagged with WP:G6, but I'm not sure if twelve-year-old redirects still fall into that criterion in practice. jlwoodwa (talk) 06:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, and good call on not tagging it with G6. Either way, definitely not a useful redirect to have. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hangkong[edit]

Hangkong → Aviation (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No affinity for romanized Chinese. Mia Mahey (talk) 04:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per WP:RLANG. There's an argument to be made that this should be retargeted to Hong Kong as a typo. I believe that said argument is wrong; there's two characters of difference between the redirect and "Hong Kong", which is beyond the scope of WP:RTYPO. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RTYPO is dependent on plausibility not number of characters difference. The two are frequently correlated but not synonymous. In this case there is no evidence that it is a common typo for (or other misspelling of) Hong Kong Thryduulf (talk) 11:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There are a number of things that use this in English but their all either non-notable, partial title matches, or both. Nanchang Hangkong University is by far the most common use of the word on en.wp but never alone. Thryduulf (talk) 11:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I think the most plausible target would be Civil aviation in China. But deletion also seems reasonable. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 16:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per Lunamann. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 20:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheTechie @Lunamann is recommending deletion not retargetting, indeed they are explicitly opposed to retargetting. Thryduulf (talk) 22:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and Modules[edit]

Template:Mfc[edit]

Template:Mfc (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Orphaned template stating that something is the current subject of Mediation, but WP:MEDCOM was shut down in 2018. House Blaster (talk · he/him) 20:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GFDL-OpenGeoDB[edit]

Template:GFDL-OpenGeoDB (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Transclusionless template which is both out of date and very unlikely to be helpful if brought up to date. It is meant for images from OpenGeoDB, but that database is currently placed in the public domain. However, it is vanishingly unlikely that this template will be needed in the future: the last edit appears to be from February 2020. If someone needs to upload a one-off image from the database, Commons is the place for that (they have their own c:Template:GFDL-OpenGeoDB). Or, if you really must upload it locally for some reason, you can use a generic {{PD-because|released into the public domain by OpenGeoDB}}. House Blaster (talk · he/him) 17:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: Speedied. Blatant hoax (CSD G3). Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Mason (TV Series)[edit]

Seems to be complete fiction but maybe not blatant enough for WP:G3. Appears to be by the same vandal that created multiple articles relating to Alexander Bickerton, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Alexander Lukinson, as well as several other MfDs that I am happy to produce upon request. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - As the nominator says, this part of a walled garden of non-existent television shows and actors. We also need to delete:
Draft:List of Mason (TV Series) characters

Robert McClenon (talk) 15:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: Speedied. Blatant hoax (CSD G3). Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:The LaRussos (TV series)[edit]

This isn't blatant enough for WP:G3 but it is a definite hoax. See previous deletions that led to a deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:BBOC, the supposed broadcaster for this TV series, and also Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Alexander Lukinson, which contains the rationale for the deletion of Draft:LaRusso (TV series). Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:24, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This is a walled garden that we see from time to time. Robert McClenon (talk)
The walled garden also includes:
Draft:The LaRussos characters.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Deletion review[edit]

^ الحي, عيسى بن عبد الله بن عيسى العبد (1 January 2023). اختيارات الإمام الطرطوشي في قضايا السياسة الشرعية (in Arabic). Dar Al Kotob Al Ilmiyah دار الكتب العلمية. ISBN 978-614-496-201-5. Retrieved 28 May 2024.
^ "Journey from Hinduism to Islam to professor of Hadith in Madinah". Saudi Gazette. 3 March 2017.
^ "অমুসলিম পরিবার থেকে হাদিস বিশারদ!". banglanews24.com (in Bengali). 25 January 2019.

[1] الحي, عيسى بن عبد الله بن عيسى العبد (1 January 2023). اختيارات الإمام الطرطوشي في قضايا السياسة الشرعية (in Arabic). Dar Al Kotob Al Ilmiyah دار الكتب العلمية. ISBN 978-614-496-201-5. Retrieved 28 May 2024.

[2] "Journey from Hinduism to Islam to professor of Hadith in Madinah". Saudi Gazette. 3 March 2017.

[3] "অমুসলিম পরিবার থেকে হাদিস বিশারদ!". banglanews24.com (in Bengali). 25 January 2019.

[1]

[2]

[3]

v t e Wikipedia community
For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
General community topics	Administration News The Signpost Goings-on In the media Meetups Mailing lists Wikipedians Statistics The Wikipedia Library Centralized discussion Village pump Idea lab Policy Proposals Technical Miscellaneous WMF Holidays Bots
Contents and grading	Requested articles Most-wanted articles Images needing articles Articles needing images Articles for creation WP:AFC/R WP:AFC/C Creation Help Vital articles Articles for improvement Peer review Good article nominations Featured article candidates Lists Pictures Topics Article translation Pages Main Page Errors
WikiProjects and collaborations	Directory Culture and the arts Geographical History and society Science, technology and engineering Wikipedia assistance and tasks Patrols Recent changes Counter-Vandalism Unit Version 1.0 Editorial Team Accessibility Organizations category
Awards and feedback	Reward board Contests A nice cup of tea and a sit down Charitableness WikiLove Compliment before criticism Kindness Campaign Thanks!
Maintenance tasks	Task Center Open tasks Backlog Category Admin category Edit requests Category Database reports Category tracker Dusty articles Special pages New pages Recent changes Controversial issues
Administrators and noticeboards	Administrators' noticeboard Incidents Edit warring Vandalism Admin dashboard Admin requests Closure Page protection User permissions Sockpuppets Open proxies Revision deletion Oversight Request Usernames Changing Title blacklist OTRS Bureaucrats' Requests for adminship and bureaucratship Arbitration Committee Requests Enforcement
Content dispute resolution	Requests for comment Third opinion Dispute resolution noticeboard Biographies of living persons Conflict of interest External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view No original research Reliable sources
Other noticeboards and assistance	Regional notice boards Requests for help Category Asking questions Teahouse Help desk Reference desk Adopt-a-user Copyright assistance Copyright investigations Text problems Media questions Resource requests Mergers History mergers Moves Page importation Spam Blacklist Whitelist Bots Education General sanctions Editor sanctions Long-term abuse
Deletion discussions	Guide Admin Today Articles Templates Files Categories Redirects Miscellany Speedy Proposed BLP Review Undeletion Arguments to avoid Arguments to make Article Rescue
Elections and votings	Requests for comment (meta) Wikimedia Foundation elections WP Democracy Voting is not evil Milestones
Directories, indexes, and summaries	Departments Edit summary legend Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Abbreviations Help Manual of Style Simplified Rules Five pillars Policies Guidelines Shortcuts Templates Citation templates Tips Today Tools Wiki markup
Media Category Templates